I want to play something unique, but I need suggestions

[Doc]

I've been playing shmups for 25 years. They're my favourite genre, and I *hate* Ikaruga.

Just because you've been playing shoot em ups for 25 years doesn't make your opinion any more valid, and it's that kind of attitude that will put off young shoot em up newbies and eventually lead to the downfall of your already niche dying genre.

Also, I don't want to play for score. Different forms of chaining and different patterns to memorise are not big enough differences to warrant trying to master another shoot em up to me. You play to win, and you play to beat your last score, and that's great. But for the love of god don't go around acting as though everyone should want to do that.

And I see nothing wrong with health bars. I wouldn't want to see them in EVERY shoot em up mind you but calling them a curse on the genre is ignorant, and it's ignorant to believe that shoot em ups can't be forgiving. There really aren't enough forgiving shoot em ups to help introduce people into the genre, neither is there enough variety and evolution, and I think these are massive problems in the long run.

Your post can pretty much be summed up as 'The nerve of you not doing things my way!'. I love the elitist purist shoot em up fans who think that by trying to uphold traditional shoot em up mechanics for every game they think they are helping the genre, when in actual fact they're slowly killing it.

On a more positive note, thanks for the suggestions folks! Also Corn, I downloaded and tried out that Rayhound game. I really love it! Thank you for that.

[skate323k137]

I'm kinda with elvis on this one actually, except that i do enjoy ikaruga from time to time.

As far as playing for score, you don't have to play for the world record, but I've found many games to be a lot more fun after learning the scoring system; namely Mars Matrix, Giga Wing, Homura, Shikigami no shiro 2, and ESPgaluda (all of which are games I'd recommend to the OP). I'm not the best shmup player in the world, but sometimes dodge,shoot and bomb can get a little mindless.

The only shmup-like game that i'm glad has a health bar is the Red Star. awesome game, but i need the slack for the beat 'em up parts.

[bobbynewmarkiii]

heh, this topic proved a little more controversial than expected!

If some of you guys like health bars, you might enjoy 1942: Joint Strike on PSN - it takes soo many hits to kill you, and you keep on getting extra lives; even for playing really badly! In all seriousness, this game does seem to offer some innovation in multiplayer, both online and off, as you can initiate some 'joint strike' clothes-line type attacks (is that even a type of attack?) which will only work with co-operation in 2-player. Apart from this, however, I'm not really a fan of the game, it's too forgiving and, whilst I don't bother with hi-scores in all shmups, I'm real pissed that my copy of 1942 JS doesn't rank or record any of my scores online or locally, no matter how low or high.

Yeah, so, elvis let the cat among the pigeons! For me, chasing scores can be really satisfying, but only comes when I get to know a game past the point where either i) i can survive, or ii) i know i can't survive, (in all honesty though, I don't have many games in category i) ).

I find that, if I enjoy a game enough to continue playing it knowing that I'm not likely to be able to beat it any time in the near future, or indeed after having 'beaten' it ( ... ), I can gain some real satisfaction by measuring my progress and improvement both against myself and others, through high scores tables.

The contradiction comes when chasing scores then impeeds progress in the completion (i.e. 1cc) of a game, although all the time spent playing for score will still improve a player's knowledge and experience of a game, and will therefore benefit the completion effort in the long run... Take Radiant Silvergun as an extreme example - the scoring is all about colour chaining, although I'm not very good at this game, so whilst I can chain the first level, and maybe even the second on a good day (maybe... don't quote me on that) I've got no chance after this point - BUT - after the time I invested in chaining those levels, I then attacked the game from a completest perspective, and got a whole lot further, and feel a lot more confident that the game will one day fall to my finely honed opposable thumbs - following which I guess I'll have to do it all again with chains intact!

As a second example, take the supremely accessible MARS MATRIX, it's got some bastard passages, but also a really effective and easily understandable scoring and chaining system - the more kills you chain the higher your score multiplier will increase, to an almost exponential extent (i think... mathematicians please comment), and in order to tackle the 'bastard' passages, you need to be able to understand and play the game to the extent that you can chain a decent score in the game up to these points. Hence getting a high score and completing the game go hand in hand.

Yeah, so, like, I don;t think we should bust balls for being elitist, it's just that players like elvis and me are better than you rofl, that's cruel...(and probably untrue - really.. i'm having a laugh:))

I just mean that it's a way of getting more from your game... Ikaruga is a 30 minute blast all told, but I've had longer out of this game than either of the RPG's I've completed, and I'm still going strong. It's actuelly quite humbling to know I'll probably die before 1cc ing Ikaruga (I hope not, but it's a possibility...)


Oh yeah... and 'shmups' should be in the dictionary, at least then people should stop calling them 'schmups'

[bobbynewmarkiii]

ok, just re-read the thread, and think i should add;

'elvis, don't be a twat!'

[Doctor Fugue]

On topic:

If you are looking for shooters with interesting mechanics, then you should be warned that many of those games end up being mediocre or even broken because of the gimmick. Now, of course you may end up loving the game and that is great.

But, in reality, you do not seem to be looking for really unique games. I would submit that neither Ikaruga nor Zero Gunner 2 are any more ground-breaking or unique than GigaWing or Gradius or Perfect Cherry Blossom or nearly any well-made shooter. Almost any shooter that is made with care and attention will have unique qualities. It all depends on your point of view, and what you consider truly outstanding. Switching polarity in Ikaruga is neat. Mars Matrix's reflect barrier is cool. Psyvariar's grazing is sweet. PCB's scoring is complex. Battle Garegga's rank defines the game. R-type has a pod. In the Hunt does not force scrolling. ThunderForce II switches viewpoints.

You are asking for something unique but nearly all great shooters have defining characteristics that make each of them worth trying. And, as you have seen in this thread already, Ikaruga may be unique and awesome to some, and some find it to be crap. So, having someone suggest something will just be whatever they like...really you should just ask for a list of great shooters.

What I'm trying to say is (and what perhaps other people were getting at), name me ONE great shooter that seems boring and just different bullet patterns, and I'll tell you what makes it truly unique.

This is moot if you are thinking of just different ways of controlling the craft. In that case, you might start getting outside of the traditional shooter genre (which you are maybe aiming for, anyway). So, try some twin-stick shooters (Robotron, Geometry Wars), try some non-forced scrolling shooters (Sub-Terrania, Bangai-O), try some fixed or semi-fixed shooters (Paratrooper, Heavy Weapon), try some tunnel shooters (Gyruss, Tempest), or try some rail shooters (Panzer Dragoon, Sin and Punishment).

Something I know next to nothing about is PC shooters, but you should try some of those, as they generally don't have to worry about satisfying the true elitists (like me). Try Tumiki Fighters, it has a mechanic where you attach dead foes to your own craft.

Off topic:

I am proud to be an elitist. I love having arcane knowledge, and sharing discourse only with people who have the same level of involvement. I'm a fucking classical musician, for fuck's sake. The only people who have any clue what I'm doing when I perform are people who have also been studying it for 25+ years, and I am pleased to have such specialized skills. If the audience likes it, that's fine, but I don't care. They couldn't possibly understand it, just as I could never truly understand whatever they have spent their life doing. Doing something casually, for me, is insipid. I am very proud of what I know in my specific pursuits, and I have worked very hard to get where I am, and I enjoy being an authority for people who wish to learn seriously and also become part of a select population. It's not about being unique, but rather about having confidence in truly understanding something. Absolute mastery is unachievable but desirable.

So, of course I am a shooter elitist. No problem. I love the traditional genre-defining games, and I know why they are great to me. Shooters that are of poorer quality, or try to force their way out of the defined boundaries just for spite, are worthless. Soldner-X isn't bad because of the lifebar, it's crap because of poor hit detection, poor weapon system, poor level design, and other things. Of course that's just my opinion, based on what I believe to be the measurement of a great shooter.

Being a shooter elitist, I also believe that shooters have no place in the hands of undedicated individuals or casual players. Do you think the programmers want people to just have fun? They certainly do want us to enjoy the experience, but they put in all the complications and scoring systems for a reason. They are made for the people who play these games all the time. Do I care that this means the genre may die sooner rather than later? Of course not. There are more than enough shooters already made to last several lifetimes. There hasn't been any good "classical" music written in the past 80 years, but that doesn't bother me, either.

Lifebars (or healthbars), specifically, are not a problem. It is the fact that they need to be introduced because of inescapable bullet patterns. This is a design choice that exists outside the boundaries of shooters, since all shooters should be made to have a perfect run possible. Another much-maligned mechanic is the inertia of craft (post-input); this is also a completely useless mechanic that absolutely should not exist in a shooter. What defines a shooter? Take every game that could be called a shooter, put them together, and a definition will emerge. It has evolved; rules don't govern the games, games govern the rules.

And anyone who claims shooters are not accessible to beginners is just whining. Too fucking bad. I didn't come out of the womb playing shooters, so I must have started somewhere. And yes, while we're at it, I definitely begrudge the popularity of video games. Whenever something is available for the masses to consume, the percentage of people who understand it approaches zero.

This reminds me of the grandmother/Ferrari problem. Imagine a grandmother who drives an F40 to get groceries and run errands. Assuming she has enough capability to handle that beast, let's say she never goes over 60km/h and never uses it in such a way that any econo-box couldn't handle with ease. But, she loves the Ferrari. She loves the colour, the style, whatever else. That's great. No one on earth can tell her that her opinion is wrong, because it is her opinion!

However, can any gear-head say with all honesty that she is using the car to its fullest potential? No. Does she understand its machinery? Let's assume not. Does she realize its place among other cars; the context of the F40 when compared to all other cars? No. Ignorance is such bliss that she may love the car totally, but someone who understands the car will not be able to understand her position.

An elitist, a master, cannot separate his knowledge from himself, and will necessarily view others as being ill-informed. It is a measure of their character to be able to accept a casual admirer's level of comprehension (true elitists will fail this test miserably). But it is far more difficult to accept another's opinion when dealing with disparity in experience. And by far the worst, how do you "prove" that something is great to another person? Impossible.

[skate323k137]

wheres the smiley with the clapping guy?

Well said, Doctor.

[marurun]

I see nothing wrong with asking game developers to try to consider more than one type of gamer when developing games. I think the shooter genre is open enough to allow for many styles of play, from survival to goof off to high scorers. There's nothing wrong with any one game focusing on a particular group, but when the whole genre seems to be paying little attention to buy one type of play it seems problematic to me and awfully limiting.

[shallowgamer]

On topic:

An elitist, a master, cannot separate his knowledge from himself, and will necessarily view others as being ill-informed. It is a measure of their character to be able to accept a casual admirer's level of comprehension (true elitists will fail this test miserably). But it is far more difficult to accept another's opinion when dealing with disparity in experience. And by far the worst, how do you "prove" that something is great to another person? Impossible.

question #1- Does it bug the hell out of you to play a shmup with a novice? Could you get through a co-op run with a newbie without getting frustrated?

question #2- Do you guys play any other kind of game on a casual level?

I'll be the first to admit that I suck at these games. Hardcore suck. Awful. But I keep buying them to play through and admire them. These levels aren't made using a mouse, clicking on textures, and so forth. I watched a segment on the development of a Tomb Raider game, and it pretty much summed up my dismal opinion of the market over the last 10 years.

Does it excite me that the general public can't walk into a gamestop and pick up Dodonpachi? You bet. Basically, that makes me an elitist with no skills to back up my state of mind. Pretty much a poseur.

And, since I do suck, I guess my aptitude doesn't get in the way of having a good time with novices. I absolutely love when my "FPS" friends actually sit down with me and take an interest in what I collect and play. Are we bastardizing the experience because we tear through 10 continues to play through?

[thejamessea]

How can some of you guys even read your computer monitors? I mean, the distance just seems too great, what with you being so high up on those horses of yours.

[bobbynewmarkiii]

...

Are we bastardizing the experience because we tear through 10 continues to play through?

c'mon, you know you are... get some skills - put in some practice, it'll pay off - way more rewarding than some pointless, god knows how many hour long RPG about the 'empire' and the 'federation' or some shit like that...