Shmups suck according to mainstream reviewers

[iatneH]

How can a shooter change/alter drasticly? 2D shooters are mainly about shooting, dodging and optionally about scoring - that's puristic and nothing else. All that seems to be the main reasons why people play shooters and that didn't change with the beginng of this genre. A popular/mainstream shmup could of course differ from most Cave/Raizing/Treasure like shooters though, but I don't see how they can be that different to call them a completely different thing.

I am trying to say, yes, that is why we play shooters. But the argument here is what it will take to make them (the mainstream gamers) to play shooters. It seems what they want is random endless stages, epic storylines, ship/weapon upgrades, tons of unlockable content, massive online versus play. None of these things are what we play shooters for. You're right that it's not a completely different thing if it is the evolution of shooters, but if this is the speciation which will eventually cause what we know and love to go extinct, I don't think most of the purists will be very happy about it.

edit: at any rate, I don't see why any of us here need to care what mainstream reviewers or gamers think. If we enjoy our games, why do we need an ill-informed external party to tell us that we made the correct choice? If you are shopping for a new game, then you would be better served to consult a specialist opinion rather than a mainstream opinion anyway.

[Ed Oscuro]

BREAKING NEWS:

SHMUPS STILL DON'T HAVE EASY "restart" OPTION

IT NEEDS BOUND 2 A BUTTAN

(you get the idea)

i hope

[BIL]

I think The Guardian Legend's approach might be of some use to the genre these days. A shooter with a simple, unobtrusive overworld to explore and mission-based shooter segments, with lots of weapons to collect. And building on TGL, the really insane stages kept strictly optional and for bragging rights / rare items.

I think the concept of "score" seems outdated or quaint to the mainstream these days. Hence dumping forty credits into a shooter and calling it a day with "0,000,019." Maybe if performance was less about a higher score, and more about seeking out and conquering deliberately hidden-away and tough courses for rare stuff, some enthusiasm could set in among gamers who would normally miss the performance aspect of this genre completely. Ship / character customisation could be easily incorporated into a game of this type, and even a storyline (I know).

Not that I personally am waiting for such a game. I want another Raiden Fighters. And obviously it would take considerable talent to create a modern TGL-style game which truly excelled at being a shooter, for hardcore fans' standards. But that's just my personal musing on one way shooters could appeal to mainstream tastes without just presenting "Respected Hardcore Shmup: Declawed Edition." Build a suite of further, mainstream-friendly attractions around the core shooting game design, rather than just watering it down.

[RHE]

Ikaruga gets lip service.

It's sure a little bit over-praised but still many people, who don't normally play shmup, enjoy the first and second stage of the game. It just get's too hard beyond that and that's one of the problems that shmups has in the mainstream press: They're too hard or too easy/short.

It looks like mainstream reviewers does respect shmups but sometimes they're bored of them because they lack of innovation since the'rey higher developed then most other genres. The same can happen to ego-shooters and any other genre too.

I am trying to say, yes, that is why we play shooters. But the argument here is what it will take to make them (the mainstream gamers) to play shooters. It seems what they want is random endless stages, epic storylines, ship/weapon upgrades, tons of unlockable content, massive online versus play. None of these things are what we play shooters for. You're right that it's not a completely different thing if it is the evolution of shooters, but if this is the speciation which will eventually cause what we know and love to go extinct, I don't think most of the purists will be very happy about it.

I understand you know and if you replace 'purist' with 'elitists' I even agree with you. However, I don't think that shmups as being discussed here on this board will ever be mainstream again as they're 2D. Still they can easily gain popularity and being more favored by the mainstream press by improving all the stuff as mentioned here on this thread.

[orange]

I hate all these fucking posts in this thread about making features to appeal to the casual mouthbreathers.

Leave our genre alone.

[iatneH]

I hate all these fucking posts in this thread about making features to appeal to the casual mouthbreathers.

Leave our genre alone.

I hope you are not referring to my posts, because I wrote those with exactly your sentiments.

[BIL]

I hate all these fucking posts in this thread about making features to appeal to the casual mouthbreathers.

Leave our genre alone.

I hope you're not imploring anyone here to "leave our genre alone." Nobody has described the tailoring of shooters for the mainstream as much better than a theoretical necessary evil.

[Udderdude]

I hate all these fucking posts in this thread about making features to appeal to the casual mouthbreathers.

Leave our genre alone.

I hope you're not imploring anyone here to "leave our genre alone." Nobody has described the tailoring of shooters for the mainstream as much better than a theoretical necessary evil.

Except me. I've allready stated that tailoring shooters to the mainstream would start with making them much, much easier, and levels that are much longer, to stop the "OMG too hard" and "OMG so short" complaints.

Of course the result would long, blah-filled levels with nothing interesting going on for several minutes. And the mainstream would love them .. well, I don't know about love them, but they wouldn't rant like retards about how they're too hard/short.

[The Coop]

Regarding the idea of "mainstream" popularity, I don't see why that would be a bad thing. Back in the late 80s and early 90s, shmups were quite popular. The arcades and consoles of the time saw many releases, with plenty of classics coming from that influx. Then from 1993 to about 1998, the popularity began to wane considerably, and that's when we started seeing things like manic and bullet curtain shmups coming about (which seem to be far more popular in the genre around these parts). Since then, shmups have been sporadic in their appearance by comparison, and we've seen the occasional release (like Ikaruga) that really gave the genre a shot in the arm. Various companies have tried to keep the genre alive by spicing it up for the last 15 years, and look at what was spawned as they did so?

So what would happen if it did get popular again? Well, companies would likely start making games based off of what's popular out there now... namely, manic and bullet curtain. We'd see a big influx of varying quality titles within those areas, with more "old school" entries along the lines of Gradius V and R-Type Final as well. Traits would be borrowed, ideas would be tweaked, and concepts would be tried as companies fought for those gamer dollars. Eventually, the popularity would die off again, and... then what? The last time this happened, we saw the creation of a new breed of shmups... one that has brought various people to scoff at the shmups of old these days. Who's to say that this won't repeat itself, and result in yet another take on shmups? We went from "kill everything that moves", to "kill everything that moves and crank up your bonus/multiplier while dodging/scraping ungodly amounts of bullets". Who knows what the next step would be?

As such, I'd like to see shmups enter the realm of mainstream popularity again. I'd like to see the kind of regular release schedule that was around in the late 80s and early 90s, as companies continually pump out shmups. Some would be stale and dull, some would be interesting, and classics would be born on a more numerous scale as companies tried to be different from, or one up, their rivals... just like the old days. And then when the dust settles, and the best of what came to pass stands tall, where would the shmups world be? What would slowly follow for years to come? Frankly, I'm curious to find out.

For The Coop,

That is wishful thinking that such a resurrection of arcade shmups akin to the former glory days of the 1980s and 1990s would come back. It's better to appreciate with what is already out from a handful of arcade shmup game developers and will be coming out over the next few years considering that Cave still expresses a desire to keep making them (as long as they are profitable). When Cave makes it's final arcade shmup title, that will be the end of an era.

We all know that the "Golden Age" of shmups has come and gone never to be repeated ever again. If you feel like reliving it, take a time machine back to those eras (hint : Mame is great for such excursions) and you'll be just fine. ^_~

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

Oh, I'm quite familiar with MAME, and my collections for the Genesis/MegaDrive, SNES and such get a regular dust off. Trust me on that I'm just interested in seeing where the genre would go if it had a resurgence. We know what happened the last time it was deemed a viable gaming area by game companies and players alike. The next step could be interesting.

Regarding the idea of "mainstream" popularity, I don't see why that would be a bad thing. Back in the late 80s and early 90s, shmups were quite popular. The arcades and consoles of the time saw many releases, with plenty of classics coming from that influx. Then from 1993 to about 1998, the popularity began to wane considerably, and that's when we started seeing things like manic and bullet curtain shmups coming about (which seem to be far more popular in the genre around these parts). Since then, shmups have been sporadic in their appearance by comparison, and we've seen the occasional release (like Ikaruga) that really gave the genre a shot in the arm. Various companies have tried to keep the genre alive by spicing it up for the last 15 years, and look at what was spawned as they did so?

This is part of my argument. Just so you know I'm not trying to attack you, but I want to point out that you assume that the shooters as we know them today will be popular. Apologies if I have misinterpreted your words.

However, as we have already seen with mainstream gamers and reviews, the shooters as we know them today are not popular and will not reach mainstream popularity given the fancies of modern gamers.
So here is my opinionated prediction, that if "shooters" are to become popular again, the genre will in the process be so drastically altered from what we recognise and love today that it will be difficult for the purists to enjoy.

That's the problem with being a purist... it's too damned constricting

I agree that games like DoDonPachi likely wouldn't bit a big hit in the mainstream of today. It's tough, it's brutal, it's "short", and it requires a lot of practice even if you're just playing for score. But as we've both seen, times change, and gamers do as well. History also has a funny way of repeating itself, and bringing back things that were long forgotten by a lot of people, or perhaps even known about for the younger folks. The retro scene shows that (though it's faded a bit over the last couple years). And as games like Ikaruga have proven, all it takes is one interesting "gimmick" to get people playing that might not have otherwise. The right new shmup (or series update) at the right time, could result in a renewed fanbase surge, and have the genre looked at again by more game makers.

Is it likely to happen? No, but the possibility is there. After all, who would have thought five or ten years years ago, that rolling things up into a ball would have been a huge hit, or that fighting games would take a back seat to RPGs? The gaming world's pretty odd sometimes.

[RHE]

Of course the result would long, blah-filled levels with nothing interesting going on for several minutes.

That's depending on the budget. A shmup stage can be 15min. long without much fillers/being completly boring. Gleylancer is a good example on this since It's long and not very hard without lacking of quality.

[BIL]

Except me. I've allready stated that tailoring shooters to the mainstream would start with making them much, much easier, and levels that are much longer, to stop the "OMG too hard" and "OMG so short" complaints.

Of course the result would long, blah-filled levels with nothing interesting going on for several minutes. And the mainstream would love them .. well, I don't know about love them, but they wouldn't rant like retards about how they're too hard/short.

They could call it "Shmupper's Hell." And as a bonus, the uninitiated would get to brag over conquering this "helllish" experience with no sweat!

[PROMETHEUS]

Except me. I've allready stated that tailoring shooters to the mainstream would start with making them much, much easier, and levels that are much longer, to stop the "OMG too hard" and "OMG so short" complaints.

Of course the result would long, blah-filled levels with nothing interesting going on for several minutes. And the mainstream would love them .. well, I don't know about love them, but they wouldn't rant like retards about how they're too hard/short. :lol:

Have you played Stardust HD, the next-gen game that sells really well on XBLA and PSN ? It's exactly like you're saying :p Although I do enjoy it myself, it's quite fun.

[Ed Oscuro]

Of course the result would long, blah-filled levels with nothing interesting going on for several minutes.

That's depending on the budget. A shmup stage can be 15min. long without much fillers/being completly boring. Gleylancer is a good example on this since It's long and not very hard without lacking of quality.

Gleylancer also is lacking of detail. When was the last time its high score thread (if it exists) got bumped? There ya go.

Strikers games and Dragon Blaze are pretty much the perfect example of quality vs. quantity in an arcade-based shmup. Of course, people like to play their console games for longer.

Anyhow, who here thinks that some other genre is an offshoot of shmups? I'm not sure myself. Third person action games (anything and everything) have more in common with platformers. FPSes now and then have elements of shmups, but take DOOM which only had scoring in a prerelease beta - the final version is basically a collect-a-thon in 2.5D and shmup features are rarely seen in a game since (maybe The Club for 360 counts).

Achievements are basically the modern revival of scoring, and some achievement systems (notably Battlefield 2's) essentially keep a whole lot of score counters running, but the difference with that system is that it's ultimately about endurance because the challenge isn't fixed.

I like the idea of Achievements - even for shmups - because they can be tailored to announce a specific victory. For a Raiden Fighters game you can have (and actually I just remembered Aces is out) a "found every Fairy" achievement. They can be tailored for anything.

Unfortunately, the Achievements system doesn't encourage games that are harder to make a large variety of achievements because of the high number of shit games with 20 achievements that are easy to get (pressing "start" at the menu in the Simpsons game is one, I've heard). Not that shooters should appeal to the sort of fools who would complain that some games don't let them roll up achievements, of course.

[320x240]

For most players score feels like something that are plastered on top of the actual game. Achievements is one way of making score seem more of an organic part of it.

Another thing that keeps a wider audience away from shumps is the limited scrolling. You are flying this futuristic jet figher and all you can do is move forward? Of course, for us it is exactly this restricted movement that makes the genre but non-scrolling and arena-smhups are more likely to appeal to a wider audience.

I guess it comes down to this: Is there a way of smuggling a shmup into the framework of a modern game?

Of course there is a difference in appealing to a wider audience and appealing to mainstream gamers. I think the first is doable.

[Jockel]

I guess it comes down to this: Is there a way of smuggling a shmup into the framework of a modern game?

No More Heroes has a danmaku-esque shmup in it.
I have a friend who's got hooked to shmups through this.
Now he plays Shikigami no Shiro III xD
Epic win.

[Aru-san]

Another thing that keeps a wider audience away from shumps is the limited scrolling. You are flying this futuristic jet figher and all you can do is move forward? Of course, for us it is exactly this restricted movement that makes the genre but non-scrolling and arena-smhups are more likely to appeal to a wider audience.

Of course, I've seen examples of which your ship doesn't necessarily move forward, but sometimes backwards (Mushihime-sama Futari), 'downwards' (Ketsui), sometimes left and right (Espgaluda?), or ALL directions (Daifukkatsu). So in other words, recently shmup ships can move in practically all directions...just in the direction the game is guiding them.

[spadgy]

I hate all these fucking posts in this thread about making features to appeal to the casual mouthbreathers.

Leave our genre alone.

While I warm to this sentiment a great deal in a slightly cringeworthy way, and I'm certainly against the absolute tailouring of shmups for the masses, I do think diversifying is needed. We need our tough 'fuck you' shmups for punks (compliment !) like orange, but there's no reason they can't co-exist with shmups that welcome the less fevered game to a genre everybody should get a chance to discover.

spadgy the fence-sitting pussy-boy strikes again!

[Rob]

Think about how much care and design research and testing and SKILL went into the development of Cave's games, or Treasure's games, or any other really good shmup that we all love here? Then think about what went into GeoWars, which is the design of a few types of randomly spawning clouds of enemies, cycling over and over and growing more dense over time?

That's the difference between a $10 shmup and a $50 shmup.

And I'd much rather play that. You'd think people who like this genre would understand the value of simple and efficient game design.

Maybe those other options (enemy chaining and enemy chaining) aren't such great game concepts? The more control the developer has in stage designs, the less the player has (how is that good?). Putting a lot of care into a bad idea doesn't make it a good one.

[-Bridget-]

Think about how much care and design research and testing and SKILL went into the development of Cave's games, or Treasure's games, or any other really good shmup that we all love here? Then think about what went into GeoWars, which is the design of a few types of randomly spawning clouds of enemies, cycling over and over and growing more dense over time?

That's the difference between a $10 shmup and a $50 shmup.

And I'd much rather play that. You'd think people who like this genre would understand the value of simple and efficient game design.

Maybe those other options (enemy chaining and enemy chaining) aren't such great game concepts? The more control the developer has in stage designs, the less the player has (how is that good?). Putting a lot of care into a bad idea doesn't make it a good one.

I sort of agree with this, and sort of dont.

I am of course a big, big fan of Cave. I love the challenge, and their style.

I dont however, like their scoring systems usually, except for Progear, and maybe Dangun Feveron. Chaining is annoying. The only chaining-type scoring systems I like, are actually Space Invaders Extreme (best...scoring....ever), and maybe Guwange (though that one, not as much, but still nice).

On the other hand though, something like Geometry Wars has it's own type of brilliance. It's a simple design, yet also not so simple. Anyone who's played Galaxies in particular knows just what I mean.


And Kengou, I've said this to you before, lol, and I'll keep saying it till you try the game, but..... If you actually gave Geometry Wars.... Galaxies SPECIFICALLY, not Retro Evolved..... a try, you'd love it.

Remember Everyday Shooter? You didnt think too much of that one, from initial impressions, cause it's technically an "arena" shooter. But once you tried it, you were quite satisfied with it. It's a great game. It was only your misconceptions that kept you from trying it.

Same with Galaxies. For example: enemies do not spawn randomly. They actually have something similar to bullet patterns in other shmups, except in this, they'd be called "spawn patterns". And there are some funky patterns in the game indeed, JUST like in any Cave game. And also like in Cave games, the patterns might sometimes seem like absolute chaos, yet they're all still ENTIRELY FAIR, even if they might not look it. It's just REALLY freaking difficult.


Haha, and you KNOW I'll keep pestering you about this one till you give it a real chance


Should be noted that I like the scoring in Galaxies alot, too. The whole risk VS reward of the Geoms and such.... very well done. And the Minelayer levels in particular get interesting.....

[PROMETHEUS]

Think about how much care and design research and testing and SKILL went into the development of Cave's games, or Treasure's games, or any other really good shmup that we all love here? Then think about what went into GeoWars, which is the design of a few types of randomly spawning clouds of enemies, cycling over and over and growing more dense over time?

That's the difference between a $10 shmup and a $50 shmup.

And I'd much rather play that. You'd think people who like this genre would understand the value of simple and efficient game design.

Maybe those other options (enemy chaining and enemy chaining) aren't such great game concepts? The more control the developer has in stage designs, the less the player has (how is that good?). Putting a lot of care into a bad idea doesn't make it a good one.

I'd also add that games made to be played in arcades have to be addictive and really hard to score well at, so that the players have to spend a shitload of credits to be remotely satisfied with their score (addiction is the key to make them accept stupid challenges). To do that, developpers put features into them that truly suck :

- You have to memorize the last stages very precisely to survive or score and it will take ages to memorize them because they are far away in the game and you can't see them over and over that often. Strict enemy chaining is one way to do that. If you look carefully, some Cave games are obviously designed with that in mind : watch stage 6 in dodonpachi or Mushi Futari's stage 5. They are stages that are very directed towards heavy, precise, strict memorization for both scoring and survival, very significantly more so than all the other stages in the game. It's also well hidden to the non-experimented eye. This is their own shitty way of forcing players to waste their time on a retarded challenge to get points. Memorizers were all about that too.

- A nice impossible TLB forces you to play a nearly perfect game before you reach him because you can't beat him with less than 3 or 4 misses. So even though you get a lot of would-be satisfying runs, they force you to play thousands more runs so you get one that is truly satisfying because it completes the game. Exponential scoring system is another way to do this (you screw a very small thing up, your score is destroyed). Again most Cave games feature that kind of shit. Old memorizers did by making it nearly impossible to survive after a death.

10$ games that aren't made to be played in arcades don't have to sport those terrible flaws inherent to the business model (hi Icycalm, see how your point about "arcade games are good because they have to be" is worthless ?).

I'm not saying everything sucks about those games though of course, they just kind of have to contain huge flaws to be truly successful in arcades, while doujins don't have to. Much like World of Warcraft uses player addiction to keep them playing for ages even though the gameplay is insanely repetitive and pointless, but to a lesser degree for arcade games.

[wiNteR]

You have to memorize the last stages very precisely to survive or score and it will take ages to memorize them because they are far away in the game and you can't see them over and over that often.

I agree with this point. It becomes really tough when a stage far into game requires difficult memorization. But regardless, I don't know it would be really boring if these games didn't have an increase of difficulty as you progress.

But most TLBs have been done with a no miss or a single miss. To me that means possibility of fair completion was kept in mind by developers. I don't think having an extremely difficult TLB is a bad thing though as long as it isn't unfair/impossible. Between no one forces you to play again if you can't complete the game.

[PROMETHEUS]

But most TLBs have been done with a no miss or a single miss. To me that means possibility of fair completion was kept in mind by developers. I don't think having an extremely difficult TLB is a bad thing though as long as it isn't unfair/impossible. Between no one forces you to play again if you can't complete the game.

I agree for a fair share of Cave's games, but what about Futari Ultra's TLB ? Also, I don't think it's as simple as "no one forces you to play again if you can't complete the game". I really think they're relying heavily on the players' addiction, they're trying to build and increase it until you just can't see yourself giving up before you get that all clear.

[kengou]

On the other hand though, something like Geometry Wars has it's own type of brilliance. It's a simple design, yet also not so simple. Anyone who's played Galaxies in particular knows just what I mean.


And Kengou, I've said this to you before, lol, and I'll keep saying it till you try the game, but..... If you actually gave Geometry Wars.... Galaxies SPECIFICALLY, not Retro Evolved..... a try, you'd love it.

Remember Everyday Shooter? You didnt think too much of that one, from initial impressions, cause it's technically an "arena" shooter. But once you tried it, you were quite satisfied with it. It's a great game. It was only your misconceptions that kept you from trying it.

Same with Galaxies. For example: enemies do not spawn randomly. They actually have something similar to bullet patterns in other shmups, except in this, they'd be called "spawn patterns". And there are some funky patterns in the game indeed, JUST like in any Cave game. And also like in Cave games, the patterns might sometimes seem like absolute chaos, yet they're all still ENTIRELY FAIR, even if they might not look it. It's just REALLY freaking difficult.


Haha, and you KNOW I'll keep pestering you about this one till you give it a real chance


Should be noted that I like the scoring in Galaxies alot, too. The whole risk VS reward of the Geoms and such.... very well done. And the Minelayer levels in particular get interesting.....

That proves my point, though. Galaxies is a full retail game. I was just talking about Retro Evolved, which really doesn't have much of a scoring system besides "survive for as long as possible." I'm not saying it's a bad game, I own it and I think it's ok although I don't find myself wanting to play very much. I'm just saying that Cave's games (for example) are on such a higher level of quality. The way the levels are designed around the scoring system (whether you like the scoring system or not), the way the bullet patterns on the bosses are designed, the pacing and everything else that works together to create an amazing shmup. Even Everyday Shooter, which I do enjoy, still isn't close to anything Cave's done in my opinion, but then I could be biased there. To its credit, Everyday Shooter does have something like 7 levels each with their own unique and fun scoring systems and tons of crap to dodge and shoot, so that seems to be an exception to the rule.

[MikeB]

We love shmups at Retro Gamer magazine. You should all buy that instead.

Next months issue has a Making of Border Down a developer look back on Konami and an appreciation of the Saturn's wonderful Salamander Deluxe Pack compilation...

[burnsro]

We love shmups at Retro Gamer magazine. You should all buy that instead.

Next months issue has a Making of Border Down a developer look back on Konami and an appreciation of the Saturn's wonderful Salamander Deluxe Pack compilation...

I got the Dreamcast issue. Has another one been released that I should look for before the Border Down issue?

And it is the only game magazine I can put up with anymore. I was looking through EDGE and nothing interested me.

[burnsro]

I'm not saying everything sucks about those games though of course, they just kind of have to contain huge flaws to be truly successful in arcades, while doujins don't have to. Much like World of Warcraft uses player addiction to keep them playing for ages even though the gameplay is insanely repetitive and pointless, but to a lesser degree for arcade games.

All videogames are repetitive and pointless.

Gears of War. Shoot. Hide behind a wall. Shoot. Wide behind a wall.
Mario. Jump around and stomp things. Reach the end of the level. Repeat.
PSO. Shoot/slash enemies to get to the next room. Repeat.

And most doujin STGs suckass compared to commercial arcade games. That's why no one competes for score in them. Touhou seems to be the only one really noteworthy.

[Zebra Airforce]

^^^^^^^^^^http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.ph ... 90&start=0

[MikeB]

We love shmups at Retro Gamer magazine. You should all buy that instead.

Next months issue has a Making of Border Down a developer look back on Konami and an appreciation of the Saturn's wonderful Salamander Deluxe Pack compilation...

I got the Dreamcast issue. Has another one been released that I should look for before the Border Down issue?

And it is the only game magazine I can put up with anymore. I was looking through EDGE and nothing interested me.

This will be issue 53. If you've not seen it, issue 51 has a Making of R-Type Delta though...

[P_HAT]

And most doujin STGs suckass compared to commercial arcade games. That's why no one competes for score in them. Touhou seems to be the only one really noteworthy.

lolwut? Look to score board.

[PROMETHEUS]

I'm not saying everything sucks about those games though of course, they just kind of have to contain huge flaws to be truly successful in arcades, while doujins don't have to. Much like World of Warcraft uses player addiction to keep them playing for ages even though the gameplay is insanely repetitive and pointless, but to a lesser degree for arcade games.

All videogames are repetitive and pointless. :roll:

Gears of War. Shoot. Hide behind a wall. Shoot. Wide behind a wall.
Mario. Jump around and stomp things. Reach the end of the level. Repeat.
PSO. Shoot/slash enemies to get to the next room. Repeat.

And most doujin STGs suckass compared to commercial arcade games. That's why no one competes for score in them. Touhou seems to be the only one really noteworthy.

You're not making much of a point here. Of course you could describe almost everything you can do in your life as being repetitive like that, but what I was pointing out is how exactly identical 2 shooter runs can be. When you're playing Go, you're always laying stones on a board over and over, but no two games are the same and each brings up something different and interesting. Same goes for games of some RTS or FPS... but not with STGs.