Hori shmup characteristics I don't like.

[neorichieb1971]

Just played some Gradius 5 in the last few days. Its the first hori i've played since R-type delta I think.

One thing i've noticed about Hori's is how much enemy fire comes from behind your craft, how the whole terrain is occasionally rotated to assist fire or debris from behind your craft as well.

I find this somewhat tedious and after watching Ben Shinobi's superplay video of Gradius 5, obviously some thought has to go into your multiples option in the very begining! Which begs the question why there are options in the first place. Surely it would be better to force the player to use the best option for multiples? Right or wrong?

Another thing is that it gets awfully cramped in hori's sometimes, the terrain forces you into tight spots and there is sometimes at least 2 forms of enemy fire of varying AI coming for your ass. There also seems to be alot more in the way of enemies that require to be hit in certain places. In Gradius, a thief comes along and even steals your multiples . Cheeky bugger!

I also find hori's to have the "if you die once, its game over" thing going on. To see if Gradius 5 was most guilty of this, I put on 3 & 4 and OMG, G5 is tame in comparison.

I noticed on R-type Final and G5 there are a few intervals where the game goes into semi long introductions, G5's level 2 start is somewhat annoying after the 35th time of seeing it. R-type final is somewhat annoying in that if you die you start a ways back. Isn't it demoralising to know that you died all powered up, only to have to achieve the same goal with your pants around your ankles?

I'm not the best shmupper out there, but Verts have much more continuous gameplay, play fairer and in most that I'm aware of, let you use the whole screen as the playing field. I find that in most Verts, the bullets are color coded and much bigger, patterns also play a part in recognition of enemy fire.

So there you have it, I love G5 to bits, not too fond of RTF because it keeps starting and stopping and playing upside down (the scrolling I mean). I do love the occasional hori, but nothing beats the pure addrenalin rush of the vert.

For the record, I think G5 is one of the most accomplished hori's i've played. I think I still like Blazing star better though.

I'm a happy camper playing Gradius 5, make no mistake! I just think it puts you in many circumstances where you think "WTF am I supposed to do!" rather than "Oh, I get it, you have to do this" type thing.

[Macaw]

The Gradius and R-type games pretty much invented the whole 'cramped' style of playing, where memorization is required to get through the stages as there are so many times you will die from a terrain obstacle or somthing. With the exception of these 2 franchises most other hori's more or less just play like vert's.

[WarpZone]

I find this somewhat tedious and after watching Ben Shinobi's superplay video of Gradius 5, obviously some thought has to go into your multiples option in the very begining! Which begs the question why there are options in the first place. Surely it would be better to force the player to use the best option for multiples? Right or wrong?

I wouldn't say there is a best multiple type. The stage design was built with every type in mind, even if Directional sometimes seems like the most 'obvious' one to use. Generally Freeze and Directional are more versatile, yet a bit more challenging to use. You can do less with Spacing and Rotation, yet it's easier to be consistent.

Every type is capable of hitting enemies from behind (even without switching to tailgun), and a lot of the challenge is, as you said, figuring out how to use the multiples to attack all these enemies coming from different, awkward directions. I think it actually makes the game feel less tedious -and certainly more imaginative- than most shooters.

[system11]

The Gradius and R-type games pretty much invented the whole 'cramped' style of playing, where memorization is required to get through the stages as there are so many times you will die from a terrain obstacle or somthing. With the exception of these 2 franchises most other hori's more or less just play like vert's.

And in many Cave and Psikyo games you're doomed if you don't memorise the bullet patterns - which is much harder than remembering key bits of scenery.

[NTSC-J]

The Gradius and R-type games pretty much invented the whole 'cramped' style of playing, where memorization is required to get through the stages as there are so many times you will die from a terrain obstacle or somthing. With the exception of these 2 franchises most other hori's more or less just play like vert's.

And in many Cave and Psikyo games you're doomed if you don't memorise the bullet patterns - which is much harder than remembering key bits of scenery.

Eh someone with keen relfexes at least has a chance with every bullet pattern in a vert. In Rtype if you take the wrong path its your ass. Scenery obstacles are the worst thing in a shooter, easily.

[dai jou bu]

I wish verts had enemies coming out from all directions trying to kill you instead of trying to imitate a hori-equse obstacle course through use of bullet streams. Seriously, if the enemy was smart, they'd know NOT to attack you head on if that tactic failed for 3 stages already.

Most of the time, they always come out from the front. Even Rayforce had enemies coming from behind you.

[system11]

Eh someone with keen relfexes at least has a chance with every bullet pattern in a vert. In Rtype if you take the wrong path its your ass. Scenery obstacles are the worst thing in a shooter, easily.

Not true - exhibit A: Gunbird 2, where you can quite easily be swarmed to death if you're not waiting in the right place for things as they arrive. Exhibit B: bullet spreads so fast you have to know the fan is coming to avoid them (again in Psikyo games, more recently seen in a couple of Raiden 3 attacks).

If you can cope with either of the two above situations, you sure as hell can react to scenery as it s l o w l y moves past you.

[BulletMagnet]

Not true - exhibit A: Gunbird 2, where you can quite easily be swarmed to death if you're not waiting in the right place for things as they arrive. Exhibit B: bullet spreads so fast you have to know the fan is coming to avoid them (again in Psikyo games, more recently seen in a couple of Raiden 3 attacks).

I agree with that much, but I'd also say that Psikyo's stuff in general is a good deal more memory-oriented than most of Cave's or Raizing's (I haven't played much Raiden, so I can't comment on Seibu). Memorization is certainly a factor in the latter companies' games as well (though oftentimes more for scoring specifically, rather than raw survival), but I'd argue not nearly to the same extent.

In any event, I always found it kind of odd that horizontals kind of ended up getting stuck with the "memorizer" label...heck, Irem could have probably made a vertical R-Type style game if they'd wanted, I just wonder why they (and most any other similar developer) hardly, if ever, did so...

I wish verts had enemies coming out from all directions trying to kill you instead of trying to imitate a hori-equse obstacle course through use of bullet streams.

If you don't mind lots of memorization this might not be a problem for you (DonPachi, for instance, has some stuff like this coming at you, especially in the later stages), but if that's not your style (as is my case, I prefer to be able to see things coming so I can try to react to them) then it becomes an annoyance more than anything else. It's not exactly an undisputed "good" or "bad" thing.

[Axon]

Another thing is that it gets awfully cramped in hori's sometimes.

You should avoid Lords of Thunder then.

[dai jou bu]

DonPachi, for instance, has some stuff like this coming at you, especially in the later stages

I didn't like DDP, even though it had a rocking soundtrack. Maybe I should play it again to confirm if the reason was because of the bullet streams since I haven't played it in years.

Zero Gunner 2 is the only shmup I like from Psykio.

I just realized now that R-Type never had a speed stage like Gradius did. I guess it's probably because the Force wouldn't be able to catch up to you if you started moving faster than the usual scrolling speed.

[Twiddle]

Most of the time, they always come out from the front. Even Rayforce had enemies coming from behind you.

vertical shooters don't often equip you with weapons that allow you to shoot behind you

[Bydobasher]

I just realized now that R-Type never had a speed stage like Gradius did. I guess it's probably because the Force wouldn't be able to catch up to you if you started moving faster than the usual scrolling speed.

I don't think so, necessarily. They might have designed it so that the Force's speed relative to your ship speed doesn't change, even if your ship's speed relative to the scenery is variable.

[BulletMagnet]

I didn't like DDP, even though it had a rocking soundtrack.

Note that I referred to the original and rather more old-school DonPachi, rather than its more famous sequel.

[dai jou bu]

Yes, that was the DDP I was referring to since the game was blessed with the power of ROCK.

[WarpZone]

I just realized now that R-Type never had a speed stage like Gradius did. I guess it's probably because the Force wouldn't be able to catch up to you if you started moving faster than the usual scrolling speed.

More than anything, I think R-Type's lack of speed levels has more to do with the tone and atmosphere to the games, which is pretty different from Gradius. There would be mechanical complications though, yes.

___

As for scenery obstacles being a "problem" for shooters, I think it's entirely a case of execution. They do make it easy for designers to throw in cheap situations, such as dead ends that are impossible to escape from (ie: earlier Gradius games) and visual clarity can usually be more difficult to get right (always a problem for me in Thunderforce...). However, when done right, scenery obstacles open up different opportunities for level design that would be impossible or awkward to convey just with moving bullets. With proper pacing, cheap situations can be avoided, and I think it's also somewhat easier for the level design to give the player more cues as to what's coming up.

Another strength of the horizontal mentality (which I think is somewhat underrated) is its ability to convey certain emotions and experiences more effectively- such as claustrophobia, and nervously rushing through a narrow space to get out into the open. The vertical mindset, for all its own unique advantages, often comes off as a bit mechanically dry regardless of the creativity that sometimes goes into the patterns.

[WarpZone]

In any event, I always found it kind of odd that horizontals kind of ended up getting stuck with the "memorizer" label...heck, Irem could have probably made a vertical R-Type style game if they'd wanted, I just wonder why they (and most any other similar developer) hardly, if ever, did so...

Yeah. Image Fight's probably IREM's best example of a vertical shooter that plays like R-Type. And then there are the Treasure shooters (apparently Radiant Silvergun's biggest inspiration was Image Fight). Still though, yes, these are definitely in the minority. The vast majority of shooters that scroll horizontally play "one way", and vertically scrolling shooters play "another way", so referring to a game as a "horizontal" or a "vertical" has become a bit of a loaded term. Scenery-based vs. bullet-based would actually be less misleading terms overall (or something similar ).

[BulletMagnet]

Yes, that was the DDP I was referring to since the game was blessed with the power of ROCK.

Well, yeah, but I mentioned DP as a more "memory-based" vertical-oriented game, since enemies, especially in later levels, have a tendency to come from nowhere and bash into you...if you haven't played the level before, you're all but assured of several deaths.

And then there are the Treasure shooters (apparently Radiant Silvergun's biggest inspiration was Image Fight).

Those are tough ones for me to group as far as this conversation's concerned...while memorizing chains and such is definitely "score-related" and not "survival-related" in the "traditonal" sense, in RSG your score is connected not only to the extra lives you can earn but to your weapon power (and thus your survival), while in Ikaruga, while chaining is more "optional," I'd say that it's even more "emphasized" than in RSG, since in Ikaruga you don't have all the different weapons to mess with or other types of bonuses to try for, so except for the color-changing bit it's about the only prevalent gameplay feature that immediately gets your attention.

[dai jou bu]

Well, yeah, but I mentioned DP as a more "memory-based" vertical-oriented game, since enemies, especially in later levels, have a tendency to come from nowhere and bash into you.

I could've sworn it said "DoDonpachi..." ><

The vertical mindset, for all its own unique advantages, often comes off as a bit mechanically dry regardless of the creativity that sometimes goes into the patterns.

There is hope though for verticals though, if the 5th (or 6th? I don't remember) stage of Trizeal was any indication. Trying to avoid crashing into the bridges (which rotated) during descent while simultaneously trying to avoid getting hit by enemy gunfire and then navigating through the gun turrets was pretty nifty. Too bad the game's nowhere near as influential as Cave's latest offering though.

vertical shooters don't often equip you with weapons that allow you to shoot behind you

Developers can make it so you can not be able to fire backwards (or have limited capability to do so) and still deal with enemies behind you.

I don't know. I seriously find it very odd that the enemy you're up against in many shmups is able to somehow stockpile all of these weapons that would make the US military forces jealous, but has a tactician who doesn't take advantage of the fact that all of your weapons are located at the front and you're very vulnerable from behind. It shouldn't take a supercomputer that's achieved sentience to figure this out.

[Andi]

Another strength of the horizontal mentality (which I think is somewhat underrated) is its ability to convey certain emotions and experiences more effectively- such as claustrophobia, and nervously rushing through a narrow space to get out into the open. The vertical mindset, for all its own unique advantages, often comes off as a bit mechanically dry regardless of the creativity that sometimes goes into the patterns.

I'm inclined to agree with this although it seems strictly like personal taste. Horizontal shooters tend to have more interesting backgrounds for me as well. Plus, how can a game include the all important alien stomach level without bloody teeth-lined walls that constrict on the player?

On another note, lots of vertical and horizontal shooters (games with both parts) seem to have vertical levels that emulate horizontal play. Abadox, Life Force, and Legendary Wings on the NES have branching paths made out of tight walls and obstacles on their vertical sections. Abadox is especially notable as being super-confined throughout.

[neorichieb1971]

I don't mind enemy fire from behind if the game design doesn't feel awkward to shoot backwards. In most hori's, it most definately feels more alien and uncomfortable shooting backwards.

In Hellfire (Genesis/Megadrive) it doesn't bother me because I feel comfortable using the 4 way fire mechanism.

If for example in Cave examples of Verts a third button was used for backwards fire, or pressing an A+B combination would shoot backwards, I would welcome enemy/enemy fire from behind.

I guess its just a peace of mind thing. If I swept the area clean when passing, I find it dishonorable for a game to attack me from there if I have no backwards fire mechanism which works well in the game. Well, I would say if you could turn around that would work as well

[NTSC-J]

Eh someone with keen relfexes at least has a chance with every bullet pattern in a vert. In Rtype if you take the wrong path its your ass. Scenery obstacles are the worst thing in a shooter, easily.

Not true - exhibit A: Gunbird 2, where you can quite easily be swarmed to death if you're not waiting in the right place for things as they arrive. Exhibit B: bullet spreads so fast you have to know the fan is coming to avoid them (again in Psikyo games, more recently seen in a couple of Raiden 3 attacks).

If you can cope with either of the two above situations, you sure as hell can react to scenery as it s l o w l y moves past you.

I disagree. As fast as they are, players used to Psikyo speeds can get through any given pattern. Gunbird 2's 2-6 boss has some ridiculous stuff, but you do have a chance of tap-tap-tapping in the right spot. As Warpzone mentioned, if you take the wrong path in a Gradius or Rtype only to find there's a dead end, you have absolutely no choice.

Regardless, whenever I run into a floor or ceiling I get pissed. It's not why I play shooters. Personally, I want to weave through bullet mazes and come out a winner, not poke around some labyrinth of shoddy hit detection.

To take it further, I think of horis as a tight-rope walk and verts as a dance. Both take skill, but there's a key difference in execution. One is graceful and smooth, the other nervous and tense. But to each his own.

[Shocky]

Regardless, whenever I run into a floor or ceiling I get pissed. It's not why I play shooters. Personally, I want to weave through bullet mazes and come out a winner, not poke around some labyrinth of shoddy hit detection.

To take it further, I think of horis as a tight-rope walk and verts as a dance. Both take skill, but there's a key difference in execution. One is graceful and smooth, the other nervous and tense. But to each his own.

I would say one is nervous, tense and brain-activating, and the other is simple, meditative and unrewarding

Well, personally these characteristics are the reason why I love horizontals so much. Narrow corridors and unexpected terraformations rock! OK, I admit that it's criminality to design choices of routes that are blatantly impossible. The best moments are these tight situations like in Gradius II (MSX) stage 3, where you need to destroy some columns supporting the ruins and can therefore end up in a dead-end, but if you're fast and bold, you can navigate under the falling debris. Or in Gradius: Gofer no Yabou episode II, stage 3, where the gravity is trying to suck the player's ship to collide with the ground. These exciting elements can mainly be seen in horis.

*cough*hitboxes are shoddy hit detection anyway*/cough*

Actually I'm not too keen on this vertical "it's 1cc or nothing" thing, so I prefer horis with checkpoints and unlimited credits, provided that the game is hard enough to offer a good challenge (Gradius IV for example).

The only thing I agree on with the originator of this thread is that unskippable "interlude" animations suck big time, and mainly horis are guilty of this. The one in Level 2 of Gradius 5 is just major stupidity from the designers, and in R-Type Final stage 4 there is this boring, slow and long animation when the ship plunges into the tank to face the boss. It's so irritating that I really try not to die there to avoid seeing it again.

[Ganelon]

Yeah. Image Fight's probably IREM's best example of a vertical shooter that plays like R-Type.

True, because it's methodical, simple, and features fast enemies designed to smash into you. However, even it has very little background objects to speak of unlike most horis.

Speaking of ways to take care of rear enemies, Image Fight was also unique in allowing the speed-change afterburner to deal huge damage to enemies right behind you. That would've been useful since many enemies circle back behind you in the game but the range was too short compared to blazing speed of enemy ships, making it more effective as a quick way to destroy certain bosses. Now, if the player ship had a longer afterburner attack, that could be pretty interesting IMO.

[NTSC-J]

Shocky - I dunno, I can judge most verts' hitboxes a whole lot easier than most horis' landscapes. Not many Rtypes have the hit box actually displayed during gameplay. To be fair, most verts don't either, but in general I don't need it anyway, I can usually feel it out right away.

But we've obviously got different tastes. The part you mention in Gradius where you have to destroy the walls and get past them as they fall is one of the worst moments in gaming IMO. Yea real fun when you die right beforehand and all you can do is throw tiny little beads at it furiously as you watch your ship helplessly crash into it. "Brain-activating" nothing, that's more like blood pressure rising to the point that the game disc finds itself flying out of my window.

[Shocky]

Shocky - I dunno, I can judge most verts' hitboxes a whole lot easier than most horis' landscapes. Not many Rtypes have the hit box actually displayed during gameplay. To be fair, most verts don't either, but in general I don't need it anyway, I can usually feel it out right away.

Maybe, maybe not. I only trust what I see, and collision detection is OK in almost all horis that I play. There are some irritating exceptions though. In verts I'm having major difficulties, but that may be because I don't play them so much. I love the chaos and graphics of Cave games, but I don't appreciate the game play... yet, anyway.

But we've obviously got different tastes. The part you mention in Gradius where you have to destroy the walls and get past them as they fall is one of the worst moments in gaming IMO. Yea real fun when you die right beforehand and all you can do is throw tiny little beads at it furiously as you watch your ship helplessly crash into it. "Brain-activating" nothing, that's more like blood pressure rising to the point that the game disc finds itself flying out of my window.

Yeah, it's just a matter of taste. For me, dying and losing weapons is an interesting situation, a startpoint of another type of gameplay: extreme survival. That's when brains are needed the most, especially in Gradius type games when you have control over what weapons to "buy" with the power-up pods. Sometimes it's not even worth shooting at all, maneuvering and concentrating on getting to a clearer situation might give the best result. I can understand that this is not what everyone wants. I just like most the idea of reaching the goal with any means available, nevermind the score.

[Sly Cherry Chunks]

I have to say I prefer horis in every way.

[captain ahar]

i used to be hopelessly dedicated to verts (at the start of my shmup exposure). these days i tend to be a more "equal opportunity" enthusiast.

if something is fun and plays well, there i am.

[it290]

I'd like to see a hori where you can turn around at any time ala Defender, only with forced scrolling. After all, these ships obviously have reverse thrusters, so why shouldn't they be able to turn around and fire at the enemy? You see this in Darius sometimes, but it' automatic, not manually controlled.

[Ghegs]

I'd like to see a hori where you can turn around at any time ala Defender, only with forced scrolling. After all, these ships obviously have reverse thrusters, so why shouldn't they be able to turn around and fire at the enemy? You see this in Darius sometimes, but it' automatic, not manually controlled.

Section Z, Side Arms and Forgotten Worlds FOR THE WIN.

[captain ahar]

I'd like to see a hori where you can turn around at any time ala Defender, only with forced scrolling. After all, these ships obviously have reverse thrusters, so why shouldn't they be able to turn around and fire at the enemy? You see this in Darius sometimes, but it' automatic, not manually controlled.

Section Z, Side Arms and Forgotten Worlds FOR THE WIN.

especially Section Z, because that game stomps all kinds of ass!

edit: and interestingly enough, they are all capcom...