Next-gen arena shooter

[WarpZone32]

Hey guys.

I'm working on an arena shooter using the Unity3D game engine. The goal is to combine oldschool gameplay mechanics with modern graphics and physics. I think it's looking pretty decent so far, and the beta-testers tell me it's fun.

Control is with keyboard and mouse, and it'll be available for PC and Mac.

What do you think? Is there anything in particular you'd like to see?

Note: These screenshots were taken by one particularly zealous beta-tester who turned the max number of enemies all the way up. Users with slower machines will probably leave it at the default limit of 32 enemies alive at once, resulting in more waves and less bullet-hell.

(Images removed pending graphical update.)

The plan is to release it commercially. It probably won't be the next big thing, but with luck maybe it will develop a cult following. In a best-case scenario, it may introduce a new crop of hardcore twitch gamers to the joys of 2D gaming.

What do you think?

[ZOM]

Ok, let me get this straight; The player's ship is red and all enemy bullets are the exactly same red too?
I'd change that

[neist]

I think this is the kind of thing I'd need to see in motion to really say much about.

The screenshots just tell me it has red and a lot of little dots.

Also, what systems are there? Scoring? Any extra features or tidbits besides just shooting?

[WarpZone32]

Ok, let me get this straight; The player's ship is red and all enemy bullets are the exactly same red too?
I'd change that

Huh. Good point.

It hasn't caused problems enough for any if the beta-testers to complain about it... I think it's the rotation of the turret as you move the mouse that's prevented me from having any trouble distinguishing the player from the shots while playing it.

You're right though, it makes for terrible screenshots, and is probably bad design just on principle!

I think this is the kind of thing I'd need to see in motion to really say much about.

The screenshots just tell me it has red and a lot of little dots.

Also, what systems are there? Scoring? Any extra features or tidbits besides just shooting?

I'm currently polishing up the beta version and preparing for a first release. Once that happens there will be a demo available. Then you'll all be able to see it in action.

At the moment there's two different game modes, with separate score-tracking for each mode. The scores aren't tied to any explicit reward system yet beyond watching the number go up, but I'm considering different things I could do with it.

I've even thought about having two types of scores for each game mode; a "personal best" for each stage and an ongoing "grind-able" score not unlike XP in an MMORPG. I could tie these to some kinda "shop" later on, but at the moment the score is just a score.

Right now, the data is tied to individual saved game files, so there's no ranking system. A web-based scoring ladder is probably beyond the scope of this game, but I could possibly implement something locally.

Did you have a preference or a recommendation for the type of scoring system you'd like to see?

[fog]

A slider to alter the max number of enemies on screen? How does that even begin to work from a gameplay balancing viewpoint?

I'd have thought you as the developer would want full control over how many enemies are on screen to maximise playability and if as you suggest that could cause performance issues then you use other techniques to overcome those (resolution settings, particle fx quantities etc)

[WarpZone32]

Good question. The only honest answer I can give is that the main inspiration for this game was Serious Sam, and I was pretty sure that game had such a slider.

(This is also why neist's question about the scoring system caught me off-guard. It's the first question you'd ask if you're coming from an oldschool arcade background. But I hadn't considered it.)

When I was first drafting the gameplay for this game, my goal was to make the game as fun as possible for beginners.

I'm using a third party game engine (Unity3D) and everyone's computer is different.

My ultimate goal was for as many people as possible to be able to play and enjoy the game. I figured 32 enemies alive at once was like "Easy mode."

But yeah. I can see how this is a problem.

hmmm.

What if I give the player a bonus for playing with the slider turned up? I'm just throwing out ideas, here.

My goal is to find some kinda middle-ground between the hardcore "play-it-till-you-beat-it" types and the casual gamers who just want something fun to do to kill five minutes. You guys aren't part of either group, I guess, but if at all possible I want to find a way to make this game work for you.

As long as you can play the game (or any given part of the game) over and over again and try to beat your previous best score, and there is a meaningful way to do this, and greater challenge equals greater reward, the purpose of a top score is served, right?

[WarpZone32]

I'm working on it... I'm probably going to end up using a combination of collectibles and chains. But the deeper I get into this, the more I realize that my game just isn't designed to be played for score.

For example, there are random elements, such as what types of enemies appear and where. I will probably add more random elements in when and where I spawn the collectibles. However, this randomness inherently means that luck will play a role in the game.

Now, I've seen shmups before that do some things randomly and still were reviewed favorably. So I know it won't completely ruin the scoring system for some of you. But I'm trying to strike a balance between a game that's replayable because you can hone your skills and strive to achieve a higher score, versus a game that's replayable because each play-through is a little different and poses interesting, unexpected challenges and opportunities.

I think if it comes down to a choice between balance and randomness, I'll usually favor randomness. But that's probably just because when I play a game, it's to enjoy the content, not for score.

If each play-through of the same level is not totally balanced, does that defeat the purpose of a scoring mechanic in the first place?

These are questions which should interest any game developer, but are probably most relevant to shmups.

[ForeverSublime]

Hello:

I do not see a screenshot of your game, but I will try to comment based on what I've read.

"Scoring" in the natural sense may not be appropriate [because of randomness], but perhaps it could be tied to survival. For every X seconds you are alive, you get points. If the enemy difficulties are grouped in tiers you could have bonuses based on:

1. +Points based on # Level Tier Enemy you destroyed
2. +Points based on How many other enemies simultaneously present (++and at what tier difficulty)
3. +/-After so many seconds, you can increase the multiplier of the bonuses

This way, longer + harder = more points. The more random the game is, the less useful score solution #3 is.

Also, regarding the enemy slider, it can be a good idea (same with a game speed slider). I am a member of the IDGA's Accessibility Interest Group, and people with low motor skills or other disabilities would find this feature beneficial - as well as a diverse contrast/color variation (Color Blindness, etc). Such features are also useful for practice. Arena shooters are good self-paced games that can be enjoyed by people of all skill levels and abilities.