Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article

This is the main shmups forum. Chat about shmups in here - keep it on-topic please!
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 14185
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Suggestions?

Post by BulletMagnet »

Ed Oscuro wrote:I don't know many people really do scrupulously follow these recommendations unless they already like things, in which case this isn't for beginners but for intermediate players, and I don't think many people prefer to have a bunch of somebody else's preferences dropped on their nose when starting with any genre - just find out what appeals to people and then look for good options based on that.
I guess this kinda depends on one's definition of "beginner" - does it imply somebody who has zero experience with and/or evident interest in the genre and needs to be actively "roped in" by the existing fanbase, or someone who's already marginally familiar with it and is attempting on his/her own to learn more? As you detect, I'm leaning decidedly in the latter's direction, insofar as I'm assuming that most readers of the article will have at least played a handful of shooters and/or read a bit of other stuff about them at some point; Racketboy himself or someone else more familiar with his site's readership would have to confirm or deny those assumptions, but in a nutshell I'm keeping the article's "tone" (for lack of a better word) similar to that of my previous write-ups, which seems to be what he's looking for. Again, though, if he or someone similarly knowledgeable tells me otherwise I could certainly change that.

In any event, you're correct that few if any will scrupulously copy down whatever list we come up with and say "I gotta play all of these" as opposed to going the "hey, that looks interesting" route, at least some of the time, and there's nothing wrong with that - that being said, it's already tough enough to quantifiably determine "beginner-friendliness" in terms of gameplay mechanics as we're attempting to do here, and all but impossible to come up with anything meaningful as far as something even more personal and unpredictable as "curb appeal" or whatever you might want to call it (i.e. one prospective player might crack up at Parodius, but be bored by Raiden, while the next might be the exact opposite. I daresay the same might well apply to Batrider and Bakraid when it comes to somebody who knows nothing about either...even then, you have to assume that the person is "shmup-friendly" enough to not just walk right past both). In my preliminary list above I have made mention of several games' themes and visuals as factors in their favor, but as I said I'm aiming primarily at players who are already at least somewhat interested in playing the games for reasons beyond just that.

Hopefully that at least partially addresses your concerns, but let me know if I'm glossing something important over.
User avatar
Edmond Dantes
Posts: 995
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:17 am

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Suggestions?

Post by Edmond Dantes »

BulletMagnet wrote:Whew, lots more stuff to tackle:
Gradius: The Interstellar Assault for the Gameboy
That one seems like a possibility, though my instinct tends to be to recommend Gaiden as a good "intro to Gradius" type of game (III on the SNES might work too, but that's kinda cheating, heh), due to the wider selection of ships and the power-up edit. Though I could probably work more than one in there if I have to.
the NES/Famicom version of Dragon Spirit.
Hmm...think this one might be a good intro to "Xevious-ish" games with two planes to attack? How would you compare it to Twinbee, mentioned above?
I haven't played Twinbee.

I chose those games entirely because I beat them after just a week of practice (and mind you, I suck at shmups. I'm relatively a newbie)

Personally though, I feel like if we're looking for an "Introduction to Gradius," the only place to start is the first game, available in many forms (including several arcade-perfect ones). Gradius III and Gaiden are great, but the amount of options might be overwhelming and I feel like you can't really appreciate them without understanding what the basic Gradius setup is and why it works. A new player shouldn't be given too many options upfront. Anyway, I feel like its wrong to start with sequels.

Still strongly recommend Dragon Spirit. Besides being easy, relatively easy to get (at least in the form of an NES cart--I don't know if it was ever ported. The Arcade version has, but that is MUCH harder), it's also a lot of fun to play.
The resident X-Multiply fan.
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 14185
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Suggestions?

Post by BulletMagnet »

Edmond Dantes wrote:Personally though, I feel like if we're looking for an "Introduction to Gradius," the only place to start is the first game, available in many forms (including several arcade-perfect ones).
It is true that the first Gradius isn't as complicated or tough as a number of its sequels...will add to the list.

Speaking of which, as the header says I've updated the first post with everyone's suggestions so far, plus one or two others I've thought of in the interim. Thanks much for the help everyone, let's keep fine-tuning this!
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Suggestions?

Post by Ed Oscuro »

BulletMagnet wrote:In any event, you're correct that few if any will scrupulously copy down whatever list we come up with
I think my point's being lost here: Although the list looks like a good stab at grabbing a bunch of favorites, both "easy" and more advanced, it's written in a way that doesn't look likely to speak to people who aren't already sold on the various kinds of gaming. For example, the following (just picked at random) -
- Shienryu Explosion (easy-to-grasp but hard-to-master scoring, comes with "regular" Shienryu if you import)
- definitely presupposes that the reader is sold on the ideas presented herein. Obviously without having seen the article it's premature of me to say you haven't talked about the right things, but I feel like I should point it out to make sure in advance. I wouldn't say it's jargon, but I would suggest devoting the meatiest portion of the article to considering what might be appealing about various games, and how the reader might look for that (which is a nice way of implying "how to spot turds"). Without giving the reader some theoretical approaches, I think what will happen is that the reader will persist in their current habits, but they won't have new insights, so they basically just get a list of shooters somebody else thought they might like, rather than figuring it out themselves. Without emphasizing why certain ideas in games have appealed to various people, in enough depth that the discussion will be sensible to a completely new player, the list is a collection of games followed by cryptic statements.

I think it is very well-intentioned, but I think it also presumes that there is a "right" kind of thing to emphasize - lots of statements about difficulty and scoring, but nothing that I can see about how a game looks. When I started out I was around lots of folks who held the Gradius series in the highest regard, but I don't tangle with their opinions; I just write about what I like and try to convert people with the soft sell.

And of course I have to say - I had lots of pro-Gradius prejudice when I started out but somehow I managed to figure out, pretty much on my own, what things looked promising to me, just by playing games and thinking about my reactions to them. No list can compete with exhorting the reader to do their homework and figure out what they like.

So to boil it down, I think coming up with a good list of games doesn't matter. It might be more instructive to come up with a list with some good games, a bad game or two (which might have some importance), some very early games (again to show what's still appealing about them), and some games which look very promising, but show in what ways they have disappointed people (a little discussion of Gun & Frontier might be helpful for example).
User avatar
trap15
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 4:13 am
Location: 東京都杉並区
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 5/3/1

Post by trap15 »

Well said, I agree with everything you said Ed. The key thing to figuring out what games you will enjoy is figuring out what makes you enjoy the games that you do already :)
@trap0xf | daifukkat.su/blog | scores | FIRE LANCER
<S.Yagawa> I like the challenge of "doing the impossible" with older hardware, and pushing it as far as it can go.
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 14185
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Suggestions?

Post by BulletMagnet »

I want to make sure I'm following you here, as we're obviously on a bit of a different wavelength. Tell me if I'm reading you accurately here:
Ed Oscuro wrote:I wouldn't say it's jargon, but I would suggest devoting the meatiest portion of the article to considering what might be appealing about various games, and how the reader might look for that (which is a nice way of implying "how to spot turds").
It sounds, off the cuff, that you'd suggest that the lion's share of a given game's description focus on why the game is good "in general" as opposed to why it's good "for beginners" specifically (though the aim is still to inform/educate said beginners). I definitely intend to put at least some of the former into each bit, but I get the feeling that this would get kind of redundant after awhile - how many times can you say "attractive visuals, tight controls, fair challenge, etc." before the audience starts feeling like they're being somewhat talked down to? Even outside of that, would the already-proposed "follow-up" listings serve much the same purpose (i.e. "if you like what you see in this game, try these too")? Again, correct me if I'm still not getting the gist.
Without giving the reader some theoretical approaches, I think what will happen is that the reader will persist in their current habits, but they won't have new insights, so they basically just get a list of shooters somebody else thought they might like, rather than figuring it out themselves.
If it isn't too much trouble, I'd be interested in reading a mock-up of some such "theoretical approaches", just to see if I could get my head around it. I still feel like I'm missing something obvious here, since I've been writing in a similar format for quite awhile.
Without emphasizing why certain ideas in games have appealed to various people, in enough depth that the discussion will be sensible to a completely new player, the list is a collection of games followed by cryptic statements.
Well, again, the question is whether we're even putting together the type of piece intended to catch the attention of people with no existing interest in shoot-em-ups in the first place, i.e. how "general gaming" versus "genre-specific" are we aiming to be? Guess we still sorta have to hash that out.
I think it is very well-intentioned, but I think it also presumes that there is a "right" kind of thing to emphasize - lots of statements about difficulty and scoring, but nothing that I can see about how a game looks.
Well, for any article that takes anything resembling a "stand" on anything (in this case,. "these games are better than most others for beginners to try", or something along those lines) you've got to be going off of some manner of hard-and-fast criteria, even if you openly acknowledge that not everyone will be operating along the same lines (I most always include such a disclaimer in stuff I write, since I'm not out to ruffle feathers). Obviously if a reader disagrees with what's written for whatever reason, well, that's that, but even then hopefully something mentioned therein might still make him go "hmm" in a way he didn't before. Or is that approach not reaching out far enough?
So to boil it down, I think coming up with a good list of games doesn't matter. It might be more instructive to come up with a list with some good games, a bad game or two (which might have some importance), some very early games (again to show what's still appealing about them), and some games which look very promising, but show in what ways they have disappointed people (a little discussion of Gun & Frontier might be helpful for example).
In otherwords, you envision this as more of a "How to Pick Out a Good Shmup" guide than a ready-made list of suggestions for a particular "type" of player - an interesting idea, to be sure, but as I said earlier this sounds like a particularly tough nut to crack once you start more directly taking on personal preferences (as the famous sig says, "No matter how good/bad a game is...") in the manner you (seem to) suggest. If nothing else, this sounds like something that (in my mind, at least) might make up a worthy sub-section near the beginning of the article alongside the other "general guidelines", but ballooning it into a full-length piece strikes me as stretching things too thin.

Again, by all means set me straight if something/everything isn't getting through.
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Suggestions?

Post by Ed Oscuro »

What I think we've discovered are two approaches, both actually valid approaches for an introductory article: One approach aims to give people something easy to run with - you might call it "pre-digested" even, not that this is a bad thing; it looks to give the player some ideas about things and many people simply don't have the inclination or time to look into obscure corners of gaming to see everything available. My idea, which is hopefully distinct from this, is to focus on introducing some different appealing features of shmups (aesthetics? Easy to play? Challenge and scoring competitiveness?), and using these discussions as a springboard into looking at a few games which are really worthwhile but which might be passed up on a first inspection. The idea will then be presented that the reader can spend a little bit of time playing through games on their own, looking for things they enjoy, hopefully with some new ideas about what they might like. I think this second approach is quite worthwhile because of all the people (myself included) who, for example, buy games, or even just play games, based mainly on the reputation. How do you know you're getting the best enjoyment out of what you're doing? Well, no guarantees can be made, but on looking into different facets of games, one can have a more sure idea of it.
User avatar
Moniker
Posts: 2149
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 3:28 pm

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 5/3/1

Post by Moniker »

Real quick: Want to throw out ring^-27 as an exemplary novice-friendly shmup. Clear hitboxes, enemy bullets on a collision course glow red, difficulty levels, and it has a system of unlocks that'll keep novices interested as well as introduce concepts gradually.
The freaks are rising through the floor.
Recommended XBLIG shmups.
Top 20 Doujin Shmups of ALL TIME.
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 5/3/1

Post by Ed Oscuro »

Just real quick: What makes novices the kind of people who are entertained by unlocks? Definitely nitpicking, but that's the sort of assumption I wanted to question...gently, I hope.
User avatar
Kiken
Posts: 3983
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 11:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 5/3/1

Post by Kiken »

Ed Oscuro wrote:Just real quick: What makes novices the kind of people who are entertained by unlocks? Definitely nitpicking, but that's the sort of assumption I wanted to question...gently, I hope.
Unlocks can help provide a sense of progression, even if it is something not directly active within the game itself. In some cases, these can grant the impetus for a player to continue to work at a game that they feel may be beyond their grasp, and perhaps even push them to start learning the game at a deeper level. This is, of course, the optimistic view of their inclusion... and certainly, the opposite can hold true ("I unlocked everything, now I'm done with the game.").
User avatar
Obiwanshinobi
Posts: 7470
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:14 am

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 5/3/1

Post by Obiwanshinobi »

I know of unlockables in other games than shmups that are pretty hard to get (yet still seem more accessible than 1cc in your average coin-op game). In shooters, I have one negative example to give - Geometry Wars Galaxies, where everything can be unlocked by grinding, which is a major turnoff for me (I feel the full game I already paid for is more wrapped up than it was needed).
The rear gate is closed down
The way out is cut off

Image
User avatar
Moniker
Posts: 2149
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 3:28 pm

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 5/3/1

Post by Moniker »

Yeah, I didn't mean to start a thing about unlocks, but they can be nice incentive to keep playing and progress when you hit a wall in terms of ability. If done properly, which I think ring^-27 does - you have to anchor specific enemies to unlock their shot type, eg. Most folks round here couldn't give a toss about unlocking things, except maybe 2nd loops, which of course is fine. But it may be a good set of training wheels to those new to the genre, and something they're used to in mainstream games. YMMV.

ring's color-coding of projectiles that are on a collision path is the more helpful feature to learn dodging, though.
The freaks are rising through the floor.
Recommended XBLIG shmups.
Top 20 Doujin Shmups of ALL TIME.
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 14185
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Suggestions?

Post by BulletMagnet »

Ed Oscuro wrote:My idea, which is hopefully distinct from this, is to focus on introducing some different appealing features of shmups (aesthetics? Easy to play? Challenge and scoring competitiveness?), and using these discussions as a springboard into looking at a few games which are really worthwhile but which might be passed up on a first inspection. The idea will then be presented that the reader can spend a little bit of time playing through games on their own, looking for things they enjoy, hopefully with some new ideas about what they might like.
As I said earlier, this sounds like a good thing to include, though if it was repurposed as this submission's central focus I'm not sure it would be the sort of write-up that Racketboy is looking for, at least in this instance. Once I start fleshing this thing out you'll have to critique my treatment of it.
Real quick: Want to throw out ring^-27 as an exemplary novice-friendly shmup. Clear hitboxes, enemy bullets on a collision course glow red, difficulty levels, and it has a system of unlocks that'll keep novices interested as well as introduce concepts gradually.
The bullet color thing looks neat, I should be able to find a place for this in here somewhere.
Just real quick: What makes novices the kind of people who are entertained by unlocks? Definitely nitpicking, but that's the sort of assumption I wanted to question...gently, I hope.
Several people have already addressed this, and covered most of the relevant angles, i.e. if we're looking at people who mostly play other types of games they'll be used to seeing new stuff appear every once in awhile, etc. As was also brought out, though, one could also take the standpoint of "that's really not what shmups are about, and shouldn't be encouraged" - personally, I don't mind the presence of unlockables in and of itself, and don't mind mentioning them in connection to a shooter, but I'm not inclined to emphasize them above everything else. Does that sound semi-reasonable?
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 14185
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 5/9/1

Post by BulletMagnet »

Tacked on a few small updates to the first post; the next one will be a more thorough attempt to pin down the final layout. If you have any additional suggestions, voice them now!
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 14185
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 6/15/

Post by BulletMagnet »

Okay, finally got back on track a bit: at this point I'm aiming at taking the final article in a direction similar to the framework laid out in the first post: now's the time for any additional suggestions/additions/etc. to be made before I start adding some meat onto the bones. Have at it!
User avatar
VideoGameRescue
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 6/15/

Post by VideoGameRescue »

One game I am not seeing mentioned, but I think is a great starter shmup is called Stratos. It is unlockable on the Nintendo DS game Kirby: Mass Attack. It is a sprite-based vertical shmup. It is incredibly easy and I think a game like that would be a great way to get people started in to shmups. It is a full shmup that takes maybe 15 minutes or so to get through (most of us would be closer to the 10-15 minute mark).

It is one of those ones where somebody plays it, then you move them in to something a little more serious, but I personally think that game really should be on a list somewhere because it is probably one of the easiest shmups I have played and would be great for somebody who is just curious about the genre
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 14185
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 6/15/

Post by BulletMagnet »

Hmm..."mini-game" shooters are an interesting area to investigate, since they are, more or less by definition, aimed at non-shmuppers. Anyone have any other suggestions in this area? If there are enough good ones I could even give them their own mini-section.
User avatar
TransatlanticFoe
Posts: 1880
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 11:06 pm
Location: UK

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 6/15/

Post by TransatlanticFoe »

I guess you're talking strictly minigames rather than shmup levels like you get in Turrican 2, Gunstar Heroes and Metal Slug 3?

You get a different single level shmup in each No More Heroes game and there's the bonus game from Tatsunoko vs. Capcom. All three are not particularly challenging, so might be worth a mention?
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 14185
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: Racketboy "Shmups for Beginners" Article - Updated 6/15/

Post by BulletMagnet »

TransatlanticFoe wrote:I guess you're talking strictly minigames rather than shmup levels like you get in Turrican 2, Gunstar Heroes and Metal Slug 3?
Those would serve a similar purpose in many cases, but usually can't be as easily accessed as something unlocked on a menu. If you can think of a particularly well-suited mid-game segment or two that would serve as a good "intro" to newcomers I wouldn't be averse to mentioning it though.
You get a different single level shmup in each No More Heroes game and there's the bonus game from Tatsunoko vs. Capcom. All three are not particularly challenging, so might be worth a mention?
Not particularly familiar with those, will have to look into. :)
Locked