Shmup of the Month Club 2013 (Giga Wing)

[Ivo]

My personal opinion is that old shmups where you get an advantage from manually mashing the fire button are poorly designed (in that respect). I understand having to manually press the fire button to keep firing as a design decision to have holding the fire button do something else.
To some extent this is comparable with the discussion of having high APM required to compete being a good thing for RTSs or not, or whether difficult execution is a good thing for fighters (like single frame connects in combos in some games of that type). There are different opinion on what constitutes good design in each of those cases as well so I'm not surprised if some or many people disagree with me on this issue on shmups.

Regardless of the design philosophy, it is clear that using auto-fire compared to not using it in such a game makes things easier for the player - tiredness doesn't come into it, and more focus is freed up. So I would suggest at the very least separating the high-scores in this case.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with it being cheating in some games to have an auto-fire though - clearly if it is the default in the home port it should not be considered as such, at least for that home port.

Technically, you could also hook up a PCB to an externally provided auto-fire system. This is analogous to what MAME is letting you do when you emulate it.
Not all arcade cabs are exactly alike even if you are using a stock PCB.

The same way, you can hook up an auto-fire controller to a console even if the game itself doesn't support it natively, and some emulators also let you do that.

Where do you draw the line if it is a peripheral-enabled advantage?
There are different peripherals that can make a game easier. Using an arcade stick instead of a gamepad can provide a competitive advantage to some. Should that be considered cheating as well? I don't think everyone should be limited to only using the default, unmodified 1st party controllers for example, and as soon as you do not impose such a limitation, the gates are open for 3rd party options (or even customized controllers) that can give an advantage that may be subtler than auto-fire.

[dunpeal2064]

Ivo's first post in our SoTM club, welcome I hope you stick around to participate a bit!


I'm not sure whether the reason is "Tired fingers", or if its "I can score a lot more with auto-fire"

To make things even more complicated, a lot of PCB players install auto-fire circuits to their boards. When Kamui did her live superplay of Battle Garegga in Europe recently, she actually brought her entire panel, as she even has a bomb button mapped with auto-fire.

It always bothered me, since when I played boards, I had no auto-fire. I just wish it was more uniform. Like, if this game accepts auto-fire, it can only be accepted at this specific rate. Maybe its like this and I just don't know?

Varth is a game, imo, that doesn't really need auto-fire. The stages can be played just fine without it, and mashing to kill bosses quicker feels like part of the experience.

I'm not quite bold enough to call it cheating though

[dunpeal2064]

Using an arcade stick instead of a gamepad can provide a competitive advantage to some. Should that be considered cheating as well? I don't think everyone should be limited to only using the default, unmodified 1st party controllers for example, and as soon as you do not impose such a limitation, the gates are open for 3rd party options (or even customized controllers) that can give an advantage that may be subtler than auto-fire.

This, I completely disagree with, and it is nothing like using auto fire. You prefer a type of controller, you use that controller. If you don't own an arcade stick, then you are likely to not be better with a stick. People have set world record scores with a keyboard, a stock 360 controller, and a stick, so none have an objectively better advantage. Auto-fire, on the other hand, IS indeed an objectively better advantage. I'm not sure what other advantage a controller could provide that would be more subtle than auto-fire?


Not that I think its cheating, but this comparison is a bit off.

Technically, you could also hook up a PCB to an externally provided auto-fire system. This is analogous to what MAME is letting you do when you emulate it.
Not all arcade cabs are exactly alike even if you are using a stock PCB.

See, auto fire circuit boards have settings. You set the auto fire to 20, 31, or 44 (for example). In Mame, you decide the rate. You could jack it up to 90, and its still just "auto fire" I'm not sure where the line should be drawn here, but a line at all would be nice.

If you are using the same stock PCB, the game (In game, not controls, screen quality, etc) IS the same. Again, I would draw the line at what affects IN GAME play. If you are talking about different PCB versions of the same game, if they are different enough, then the scores are not comparable. Usually competitive players stick to what is considered the best revision of the PCB

[Ivo]

This, I completely disagree with, and it is nothing like using auto fire. You prefer a type of controller, you use that controller. If you don't own an arcade stick, then you are likely to not be better with a stick. People have set world record scores with a keyboard, a stock 360 controller, and a stick.

What advantage would be subtler than auto fire that could provide an unfair advantage? A better controller is up to preference. Auto-fire is not preference, it is very blatantly altering the game entirely.

I can think of a few significant differences that you could get in non-standard / customized controllers. I don't see why you can call some a preference and others blatantly altering the game as it is all external to the game. It may be a question of how much it is facilitated by each of these differences, but then it is a quantitative question (and a difficult one) rather than a qualitative one.

Auto-fire converts a single press and hold into several presses. There are similar examples where you can record macros and convert a single press into several - those are arguably even more unfair and you can have "combos" on a single press.

What about a single button press, pressing two buttons for example (Radiant Silvergun may be a relevant example here, the Saturn version lets you do that compared to the arcade)?

What I meant by subtle though was mostly cases where a single press still translates into a single press.

You mentioned keyboards - compared to a d-pad, I can use different fingers on different directions as opposed to a single (opposable) thumb.

Another example, having the D-pad on the right rather than on the left can make a huge difference.

Back when we had the together retro on Defender many years ago, I was using the cursors on a keyboard, and using my right hand on them (I disclosed this in the thread at the time). I can tell you that let me do much better than I would have with the (in my opinion poorly designed) controls of the original cabinets (or anything imitating them). That helped me much, much more than auto-fire would in that game.

Having something mapped to a shoulder button instead of a face-button can also be quite a difference. For example with a custom NES controller, having A on the face and B (or vice-versa) on a shoulder lets you use 2 separate fingers where a regular controller only lets you use the thumb.
With two shoulder buttons you can have 4 fingers working rather then 2 thumbs. For a game with, say, 4 directional inputs and 3 buttons I would say having 2 shoulder buttons versus 2 additional buttons would be a significant advantage (in fact I suspect this is the major advantage competitive players get from "arcade sticks": a configuration that lets them use many fingers from their right hands).

I can also tell you how inadequate a mouse made me feel when playing marble madness for another Together Retro. An optical trackball helped a bit, but still gave me issues as I had a lot of difficulty getting large speeds (this was very clear when I needed to do some jumps). If I knew more about gaming mice maybe I could argue about some more examples from there, but I don't.

P.S. I had posted before about Shikigami no Shiro 2 I think, it is just that I usually don't have the games to participate, and when I do (like with that one) I only played it after the month was up!).

[dunpeal2064]

This, I completely disagree with, and it is nothing like using auto fire. You prefer a type of controller, you use that controller. If you don't own an arcade stick, then you are likely to not be better with a stick. People have set world record scores with a keyboard, a stock 360 controller, and a stick.

What advantage would be subtler than auto fire that could provide an unfair advantage? A better controller is up to preference. Auto-fire is not preference, it is very blatantly altering the game entirely.

I can think of a few significant differences that you could get in non-standard / customized controllers. I don't see why you can some a preference and others blatantly altering the game as it is all external to the game. It may be a question of how much it is facilitated by each of these differences, but then it is a quantitative question (and a difficult one) rather than a qualitative one.

Auto-fire may be enabled externally, but it changes the game internally. Lets say you are a boss at Varth, and you post a replay. I could tell immediately if you are using auto fire or not. However, I would have no idea whether you are using a keyboard, contoller, etc. It isn't affecting the game, it is affecting the way you control it. Basically, your controller of choice makes things easier on you, but auto fire enables you to do things that may not be possible without it.

Also, out of curiosity, what are those significant differences?

You mentioned keyboards - compared to a d-pad, I can use different fingers on different directions as opposed to a single (opposable) thumb.

Another example, having the D-pad on the right rather than on the left can make a huge difference.

These are both preferences. Neither of these control methods are objectively better than the other, nor are they objectively better than using a controller or stick. This is nothing like auto-fire. I can compete with your scores no matter what controller you are using, I cannot compete with your scores if you are using auto fire and I am not.

Auto-fire converts a single press and hold into several presses. There are similar examples where you can record macros and convert a single press into several - those are arguably even more unfair and you can have "combos" on a single press.

What about a single button press, pressing two buttons for example (Radiant Silvergun may be a relevant example here, the Saturn version lets you do that compared to the arcade)?

Recording macros in a shmup is cheating, and is not subtle at all.

Again, in RS, whether you use a 3 button or 7 button set up, I could still compete with your scores on either set up. You are not enabling something that may be impossible otherwise. I also would have no way to tell, by looking at your replay, whether you are using a 3 or 7 button setup.

[Ivo]

Auto-fire may be enabled externally, but it changes the game internally. Lets say you are a boss at Varth, and you post a replay. I could tell immediately if you are using auto fire or not. However, I would have no idea whether you are using a keyboard, contoller, etc. It isn't affecting the game, it is affecting the way you control it. Basically, a controller makes things easier on you, but auto fire enables you to do things that may not be possible without it.

Depending on the game and on the implementation of auto-fire (i.e. not one that is clearly humanly impossible, and could have a button for regular non-assisted and another button for auto-fire assisted for bosses or when needed), I very much doubt you could really distinguish some assisted plays from a very well-trained player manually doing the same.

In any case I vastly prefer systems where shmups are designed to only required a very mild mashing to get a continuous stream of fire (like Shikigami no Shiro).

In this particular case I think it is just better to separate the scores (not between PCB and not PCB, but between people using auto-fire and not - as we both agree, PCB does not mean lack of auto-fire: I also think there is no practical limitation on having a circuit do auto-fire up to 90, like you can do in MAME?).

[dunpeal2064]

Depending on the game and on the implementation of auto-fire (i.e. not one that is clearly humanly impossible, and could have a button for regular non-assisted and another button for auto-fire assisted for bosses or when needed), I very much doubt you could really distinguish some assisted plays from a very well-trained player manually doing the same.

Anyone using auto fire would have it mapped to a seperate button, like you've described above. It would break quite a few games to have auto fire mapped to your main shot.

Whether or not I could tell is besides the point, my point was to show the difference between controller prefernce and auto fire. They affect the game in very different ways (Well, the controller doesn't affect the game imo), and if you don't see that, we will have to agree to disagree.


Either way, I don't think auto fire is cheating, and I don't think the good scores here should be held to a lower respect because auto fire was used.

[dsheinem]

Depending on the game and on the implementation of auto-fire (i.e. not one that is clearly humanly impossible, and could have a button for regular non-assisted and another button for auto-fire assisted for bosses or when needed), I very much doubt you could really distinguish some assisted plays from a very well-trained player manually doing the same.

Anyone using auto fire would have it seperated to a seperate button, like you've described above. It would break quite a few games to have auto fire mapped to your main shot.

Whether or not I could tell is besides the point, my point was to show the difference between controller prefernce and auto fire. They affect the game in very different ways (Well, the controller doesn't affect the game imo), and if you don't see that, we will have to agree to disagree.

It seems to me that the acceptance of auto-fire in competition is meant to offer an even playing field for people who can button mash well vs those who can't. The reason it is unfair/cheating is because the physical action of hitting buttons quickly, perfecting timing, etc. is part of what it means to be good at a game designed not to have auto-fire. So you might be creating an "even playing field" in one sense, but you are disadvantaging those players who can meet the physical and mental demands of the game and who would thus be scoring higher than those who can only do the latter.

[dunpeal2064]

One instance not often brought up is Mushihimesama, where the scoring system is actually based around button press timings, similar to a rhythm game. People will set different auto fire rates to take advantage of the timed presses, without having to have the skill of pressing the button in time, which is VERY hard to do when you are surrounded by a few hundred bullets.

[Ivo]

These are both preferences. Neither of these control methods are objectively better than the other, nor are they objectively better than using a controller or stick. This is nothing like auto-fire. I can compete with your scores no matter what controller you are using, I cannot compete with your scores if you are using auto fire and I am not.

I don't really agree that my examples are just preferences, so I don't agree that the competition would be fair regardless of controller (apart from auto-fire).

I also don't necessarily agree that you can not compete if you don't have auto-fire. It really depends on the game.

I'll give you a clear example for my "preferences" where they are objectively better: the shoulder buttons. Imagine I have a custom NES controller with added 2-shoulder buttons, one replicates A and B. I still have the exact same options as in a stock controller (which makes the comparison trivial: the custom controller is objectively better because it has more options). But, I can also use my 2 index fingers when I want. In a game where holding buttons confers advantages (like Megaman X or Megaman Zero, and on the NES I think it was introduced in Megaman 3), being able to hold a button with a finger while being able to press another button (say, jump) freely in another finger is extremely valuable. Now if in these games where shots on screen are also limited (Megaman Zero lets you have 3 or 4 small shots at a time), auto-fire is almost worthless.
Here is a situation where you have much more of a chance of consistently replicating auto-fire manually, than you would have of delivering consistent jump and release charge shot at top of jump sequences with a stock 2 button controller compared to the custom one.

Regardless, what Dave says is correct. If the game was designed without auto-fire and confers advantage for mashing, the exact same game with auto-fire is a different game (I would argue one with better design, but not the one that was originally created). The players at the top of either game may very well be different players. Some designers opt to reward one thing, some don't. I think it is clear that the best in this case is just to separate the scores.