Mushihimesama HD (360) 24th May 2012

[Illyrian]

Okay that is an issue...

[bcass]

They only sold well by Japanese 360 standards, which are pretty damn pitiful.

They wouldn't have sold any more on any other platform. The PS2 ports sold even less than the 360 releases.

[StarCreator]

With regards to the score cap, I don't understand the 32 bit integer thing. Can't they just set the max score at 9,999,999? Why exactly is it they must use a 32 bit integer and why can't they just use like...a 128 bit integer instead?

Basically I don't understand the math behind why they have such a low score cap.

I'm no expert in regards to the limits of SH3 but using more memory space for integer storage might not be an option due to either addressing limits or processing costs. It certainly wouldn't be an issue on the 360.

[moozooh]

It wasn't an issue in DFK 1.5 which went into trillions, so I don't see why it would be an issue in any other game.

[StarCreator]

Just a lack of proper planning then, good to know.

I imagine a 64-bit unsigned integer would be enough - the maximum value there is 18,446,744,073,709,551,615.

[bcass]

I very much doubt it's a hardware limitation. It'll be something simple like them declaring the wrong integer type.

[Udderdude]

I just find it ridiculous that say, 75% of the folk complaining about this bug probably aren't skilled enough to encounter it.

Actually we don't know anything about it. It could be a bug, or could be just that the score raises far too quickly. It could be that even an average level player could perform it if he/she knew how.

[KidQuaalude]

I'm frequently amazed by the discussions on here about game design, programming, even distribution by people who clearly don't know a single thing about the subject they are speculating about.

[dan76]

I just find it ridiculous that say, 75% of the folk complaining about this bug probably aren't skilled enough to encounter it.

I think you're being generous with that 75, more like 99.

It's a legitimate concern but I agree with what you're saying. We should all be doing little topsy turvy somersaults of bullet hell happiness. I know I am.

[bcass]

I'm frequently amazed by the discussions on here about game design, programming, even distribution by people who clearly don't know a single thing about the subject they are speculating about.

Who is this directed at?

[StarCreator]

I just find it ridiculous that say, 75% of the folk complaining about this bug probably aren't skilled enough to encounter it.

I think you're being generous with that 75, more like 99.

It's a legitimate concern but I agree with what you're saying. We should all be doing little topsy turvy somersaults of bullet hell happiness. I know I am.

The biggest issue is, that 25% (or 1%) are simultaneously the people most likely to buy port of said game or put in a good word about it to their friends, and the ones who are most likely to be turned off by scoring being broken. If issues like this aren't addressed in some way the loss of sales could be pretty significant.

[Special World]

lol @ people saying "Cave doesn't need to address this shit! Be thankful you're getting the game at all!"

Should Cave just cap their scores at 1 point? "You can just play it for survival, be glad they released this at all."

If a company knows about a major problem with their game, they should seek to rectify it. Period.

A scoring problem in an STG release is a major problem. Period.

I've bought every 360 Cave release. As long as they keep making the best games of all time, I will continue to buy every 360 Cave release. The scoring bug wouldn't deter me from buying Mushi HD. But it would deter me from playing it through years and years of my life. I'd like to be able to sit down with Mushi 1.5 and be able to say "Wow, this is even better than Futari Black Label." That is something I'd like to be able to say even once in my life about a videogame. And I'd like for it to be something that holds over the years.

[Jeneki]

The biggest issue is, that 25% (or 1%) are simultaneously the people most likely to buy port of said game or put in a good word about it to their friends, and the ones who are most likely to be turned off by scoring being broken. If issues like this aren't addressed in some way the loss of sales could be pretty significant.

I think the best way to explain it would be like this:

Person A likes to play shmups for score, to compare scores to others and increase his skill. Game B can be counter stopped halfway though the game. Person A cannot counter stop Game B yet, because Person A has not played Game B. Person A has no idea whether he will ever develop the proper technique to counter stop Game B, but if he does invest enough time in Game B the cap could present a problem down the road. So Person A decides it would be a better investment in his time to play a game that will not counter stop, and does not buy Game B.

It doesn't matter if only (made up number)% will ever reach the cap. The remote possibility of hitting it will prevent people from bothering to learn to score well in the first place.

[Erppo]

I say fuck the good players. These games are for casuals and should stay that way!

[ZacharyB]

Just a lack of proper planning then, good to know.

I imagine a 64-bit unsigned integer would be enough - the maximum value there is 18,446,744,073,709,551,615.

I don't know how programming works; for gigantic scores, a la Takumi, couldn't they just have multiple integers in the same score?

For instance, when integer "Millions" goes from 999,999,999 to 1,000,000,000+, set "Millions" to (0 + whatever extra score the player earned), increase integer "Billions" by 1, then simply display integer "Billions" and "Millions" right next to each other at the top of the screen where it says "Score".

[Elixir]

Do you guys think safespots or counter-stopping is an easy thing to replicate? It's not. Often the people who find them, deserve them.

I have a theory about this possible counterstop, but I'm not sure if it's correct. What precisely triggers the screen to scroll in the third stage, is it time based, or activates once a certain thing is destroyed?

[Teufel_in_Blau]

Heh, I thought that is done via floating point:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_point

I'm certainly not a mathematic guy but I thought this is achived in storing the exponent and the base in different registers of the CPU. You get the value by multiplying the base raised to the power of the exponent. Storing each digit or a couple of digits again in different registers.

Of course that is just an idea. It might be total bs what I'm talking...

[StarCreator]

I don't know how programming works; for gigantic scores, a la Takumi, couldn't they just have multiple integers in the same score?

For instance, when integer "Millions" goes from 999,999,999 to 1,000,000,000+, set "Millions" to (0 + whatever extra score the player earned), increase integer "Billions" by 1, then simply display integer "Billions" and "Millions" right next to each other at the top of the screen where it says "Score".

Certainly, but that wouldn't take less memory space than a simple 64-bit integer would, would have a lower maximum value, and adds needless complexity.

Heh, I thought that is done via floating point:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_point

I'm certainly not a mathematic guy but I thought this is achived in storing the exponent and the base in different registers of the CPU. You get the value by multiplying the base raised to the power of the exponent. Storing each digit or a couple of digits again in different registers.

Of course that is just an idea. It might be total bs what I'm talking...

Floating point math is a lot more expensive than integer math, which is why programmers tend to work with integers only whenever possible (unless they don't give a crap about efficiency). Scores in Cave games are integers in the first place so there's absolutely no benefit to going floating point.

[Teufel_in_Blau]

Ah, ok. Thanks. New thing learned.

[moozooh]

I have a theory about this possible counterstop, but I'm not sure if it's correct. What precisely triggers the screen to scroll in the third stage, is it time based, or activates once a certain thing is destroyed?

It's time-based in 1.0, so if you don't destroy something in time, it scrolls offscreen. I'm fairly certain the key to this counterstop is skyrocketing the stage counter by being on top of destructible structures in stages 2 and 3 and gathering gems from shooting at point-blank, like in Futari BL Original. Moreover, I think at least 40% of the counterstop score actually comes from stage 2, because flowers are indestructible when closed, allowing for more point-blank time. Time will tell.

[Special World]

Do you guys think safespots or counter-stopping is an easy thing to replicate? It's not. Often the people who find them, deserve them.

I have a theory about this possible counterstop, but I'm not sure if it's correct. What precisely triggers the screen to scroll in the third stage, is it time based, or activates once a certain thing is destroyed?

You're right. Those are also the people who deserve to have their play experience ruined by a counterstop.

[Elixir]

Do you guys think safespots or counter-stopping is an easy thing to replicate? It's not. Often the people who find them, deserve them.

I have a theory about this possible counterstop, but I'm not sure if it's correct. What precisely triggers the screen to scroll in the third stage, is it time based, or activates once a certain thing is destroyed?

You're right. Those are also the people who deserve to have their play experience ruined by a counterstop.

Nobody's stopping you from matching DameK.K's Futari Ultra counterstop except a massive amount of practice, memorization, skill and dedication. It didn't ruin his experience and it isn't going to ruin anyone else's.

[Gus]

This really isn't comparable to the Futari 1.5 Ultra counterstop at all. That's just 1 mode and it took until 2008 for someone to do it. Also if you actually watch a counterstop run you'll see how even with hitting everything perfectly you're not going to get the counterstop until very late in stage 5 at the earliest.

[Special World]

Actually, the Mushi 1.5 counterstop would stand a good chance of ruining my fun, even if I never attain it.

Call me crazy.

[CStarFlare]

Right, the Futari Ultra counterstop has been done by like 3 people, five years after release. And it's probably very close to the theoretical cap for that game anyway (though I was hoping it would be fixed in the port, there was a very small chance of it igniting any real competition for a new high score).

There is obviously room for scores well above 10 bil in Mushi Matsuri, which is what makes the counterstop such a sore spot. (that and the balance issues it seems to imply) As other people have mentioned, even if I don't expect to hit the ceiling it does make the game less attractive from a competitive standpoint.

But the Matsuri version being in the 360 port is just speculation at this point, right? I'm more concerned about whether they'll be making a decent arrange mode for the main game.

[Naut]

But the Matsuri version being in the 360 port is just speculation at this point, right? I'm more concerned about whether they'll be making a decent arrange mode for the main game.

Ketsuihimesama here we go!

[mesh control]

But the Matsuri version being in the 360 port is just speculation at this point, right? I'm more concerned about whether they'll be making a decent arrange mode for the main game.

Ketsuihimesama here we go!

Nah way.

It'd be ESPhimesama.
Kakusei Zesshikai + Ultramode.
Needs more bullets

[Elixir]

Actually, the Mushi 1.5 counterstop would stand a good chance of ruining my fun, even if I never attain it.

Call me crazy.

The point is, no counterstop prevents anyone from enjoying any game, it's entirely psychological. I think you're pretty much deluding yourself if you play video games "to be the best", and not to better yourself.

If NTSC-J hadn't posted this, nobody would be complaining. Then it would be released to 360, and that one player would counterstop the game. Would you still buy the game? (hint: the answer is yes).

[dunpeal2064]

Although it wouldn't stop me from enjoying the game, it may prevent me from enjoying it as much as I could have, if I personally got to the point of counterstopping, because at that point, the scoring game is over, and it didnt have to be

Would it stop me from buying it? Not a chance. Will I still enjoy this game for years to come? Most likely

[Erppo]

The point is, no counterstop prevents anyone from enjoying any game, it's entirely psychological.

This makes no sense in at least two different levels.

1. Enjoyment is already all psychological.
2. Counterstopping at stage 3 takes away all meaning from stages 4 and 5, how is that not less enjoyment?