Idiot at EGM sez vertical shooters are as disliked as text adventure games.

Picked this up from a Prof Ganson on the Shmups board. A quote from the latest EGM in their new Shikigami review:

Quote:

---

Here what they say about Shiki: "Then how about a game that combines the two least popular genres on the planet-- text adventures and overhead shoot-em-ups-- into a single $65 package? The Shiki series has so much backstory behind its bulet-ridden hide that the creators actually made an adventure game based on it. And your choices in this adventure affect the difficulty and enemy setups of the shooting sections. When did shooter plots get so complicated? Beats us-- it's to the point where developers even sell a separate DVD with artwork, interviews, and original radio-drama bits. All this for a game in which you press a single button...a lot.

---

To write a biting little editoralizing comment that vertical shooters are all of a sudden "hated/disliked" as much as text games (as if it's a fact) is just plain childish and ignorant writing. Never mind the fact they are two astronomically different genres. It's been coming for a while now but this little stunt has caused me to give up reading EGM. There are a few editors I like but this approaches Gamepro stupidity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by professor ganson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan1CC

Who wrote/scored the Nano and Shiki reviews, btw?

---

In the case of Nanostray: Shoe (the editor-in-chief), Mark (MacDonald), and Shawn (somebody)

No one claims responsibility for the remarks on Shiki.

---

No surprises there. This is the last straw for me after the July issue where they let Jennifer Tsao write a bad review for Bomberman DS right after she said it was the first Bomberman game she had ever played. Ha wow.

I don't like either genre very much (although v-shooters can be fun in the arcade). I'm not saying he's right, I'm just saying I can understand what he's saying.

Perhaps that editor just sucked at shooters when they were a child?

What do you expect Dylan? It's freaking EGM, they've been known for idiot shit like this for years.

Vertical shooters killed my father and raped my mother.

I suck at shooters, but I wouldn't criticise the entire genre. They're fun games, even if I suck. In fact, that's the ONLY genre I can say that about. If I suck at a fighting game, or Stone whups my ass constantly, it's not fun. Same goes for RPG's, adventure, action, whatever.

Don't hold back, Dylan, tell us how you really feel.

Does it make you angry?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

I don't like either genre very much (although v-shooters can be fun in the arcade). I'm not saying he's right, I'm just saying I can understand what he's saying.

---

It's not about individual tastes, if a person doesn't like shooters then fine. But the anonymous moron who wrote that is lumping in two genres with a childish joke and spins it as if it's truth. It's like saying "Huh? You still like to play Raiden Fighters? Why don't you just play a text based game while you're at it?" See why that sounds dumb now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mzo

Don't hold back, Dylan, tell us how you really feel.

Does it make you angry?

---

It makes me feel very irritated. But I'll live. BTW, who is that in your avatar?

Soukyougurentai.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crithit5000

What do you expect Dylan? It's freaking EGM, they've been known for idiot shit like this for years.

---

Yeah I know. That's why I said "There are a few editors I like but..." But yes, I have learned my lesson.

That reminds me, doesn't Shane Bettenhausen still post here once in a blue moon?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike

Soukyougurentai.

---

...rocks my manic socks.

You're flying through the sky, towards the enemy's base of operations. Suddenly, a small fleet of small craft aproach you head on. They fire a swarm of pink bullets, slowly making your way at you with the intention of evaporating you. There appears to be a small opening towards your left.

>>>go left

I don't know that command.

This editorial is horse shit. Damn the postal service... I'm going write my senator!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crithit5000

You're flying through the sky, towards the enemy's base of operations. Suddenly, a small fleet of small craft aproach you head on. They fire a swarm of pink bullets, slowly making your way at you with the intention of evaporating you. There appears to be a small opening towards your left.

>>>go left

---

:lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FM Nick

This editorial is horse shit. Damn the postal service... I'm going write my senator!

---

Or you could write to the state's attorney general like my grandparents do. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan1CC

It makes me feel very irritated. But I'll live. BTW, who is that in your avatar?

---

It's an old picture of satsuki. I'm changing it to something One Piece related when I get home, since everyone is getting confused about who is posting.

On the topic of vertical shooters: Twin Cobra is fucking me up hardcore.

Uh, text adventures still have a reasonably-sized fanbase.

So do vertical shooters. I'd wager that they're roughly the same size (in America, at least), even. The quote's odd, but it isn't that bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Satsuki

Don't hold back, Dylan, tell us how you really feel.

Does it make you angry?

---

Heck yea it makes him angry sats!

That pic is totally hot btw, you've been looking totally hot lately, I can't wait to see what pic you use as your avatar next!

*hugs*

laters

AUGHHHHHHH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Satsuki

AUGHHHHHHH

---

*GLOMPS*

EGM's reviews are usually on-point, but they should be emabarassed to run that copy. It has nothing to do with lunatic niche fans or anything, dissing a genre that important to gaming just makes them look like they don't know what they're talking about.

Damn...I can't believe I used to subscribe to them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StriderKyo

EGM's reviews are usually on-point, but they should be emabarassed to run that copy. It has nothing to do with lunatic niche fans or anything, dissing a genre that important to gaming just makes them look like they don't know what they're talking about.

---

Some serious truth-ism going on here, I tells ya.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mzo

It's an old picture of satsuki. I'm changing it to something One Piece related when I get home, since everyone is getting confused about who is posting.

---

Dude, that is dope. The next time we get a hot chick to post in the forum and she makes the mistake of posting her picture, I'ma gonna steal it before she takes it down and make it as my sig with little flashing lights and hearts.

Wow you guys act like this is such a huge deal. Who gives a shit.

Where have you been? Sats is the resident 'hot girl' here on TNL. I swear she even has a cult. A cult!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Giga Power

Where have you been? Sats is the resident 'hot girl' here on TNL. I swear she even has a cult. A cult!

---

Obviosuly I don't browse the pic threads much. And it would stand to reaosn that a girl with fangs would have a cult....

Wow, EGM was right on the money for once. Well, almost, I'd play Zork long before I'd waste time on another vertical shooter.

By the way,

Horizontal Shooters > Vertical Shooters

Border Down 4 Life.




I don't know, what do you think?...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StriderKyo

EGM's reviews are usually on-point, but they should be emabarassed to run that copy. It has nothing to do with lunatic niche fans or anything, dissing a genre that important to gaming just makes them look like they don't know what they're talking about.

---

How do you figure V Shooters are important to gaming? Don't get me wrong, I've had Radiant Silvergun, and Ikaruga, and played a lot of V Shooters in my lifetime, but I think they're anything but important.

This wasn't even a review. It was an import watch blurb of about a paragraph in length.

A pretty good one it seems too. The game sounds rediculous.

Regardless, I find it irritating that an industry that claims to be "all grown up" and full of "mature" gamers- all gaming publications are immature dribble. :(

When did the industry ever claim that? It's fucking video games we're talking about.

I stopped reading gaming mags when I realized that I know more about gaming (and grammar) than most of the mag writers do.

I don't care what they say about two of the most stale, anachronistic genres in gaming.

Have this generation of gamers even played a text adventure game?

I have tried it briefly (Zork) on the apple way back in the mid 80's.... and I gave up because my vocabulary sucked then (ESL).

Where's he wrong? I love text adventures and shooters, but it's not like either one of them is raking in money. When some of the finest companies in a genre abandon it to make pachinko machines and hentai mahjong games, you know it's not doing too hot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chux

How do you figure V Shooters are important to gaming? Don't get me wrong, I've had Radiant Silvergun, and Ikaruga, and played a lot of V Shooters in my lifetime, but I think they're anything but important.

---

Huh? C'mon. That is seriously like saying "I own Contra and Gunstar Heroes but I fail to see how action platformers are important to gaming."

V shooters were important ten or fifteen years ago, but not anymore.

It's not exactly a genre at the forefront of innovation.

It's 2005, and people expect more out of a game then dodging arbitrary bullet patterns fired by braindead enemies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kedawa

V shooters were important ten or fifteen years ago, but not anymore.

It's not exactly a genre at the forefront of innovation.

It's 2005, and people expect more out of a game then dodging arbitrary bullet patterns fired by braindead enemies.

---

That's pretty much their review of Nanostray (it got straight 5's all across)

Which is unfortunate. Nanostray is a good game, even if it's not an innovative or important one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kedawa

V shooters were important ten or fifteen years ago, but not anymore.

It's not exactly a genre at the forefront of innovation.

It's 2005, and people expect more out of a game then dodging arbitrary bullet patterns fired by braindead enemies.

---

This does not matter. Games should not be rated for their innovation, but for their ability to be fun for people who like the kind of genra that said game falls into.

If we are going to piss on shooters for not being innovated, we should just go ahead and piss on all video games for not being as innovated and fun as say, banging a bus full of hot women while doing herion. But wait, that would be dumb, because those are two different things.

There is always going to be something bigger and better to do in life. When reviewing something, it is a good idea to keep some sort of relative perspective and confine yourself to it and not run around all willy nilly bringing up shit that doesn't seriously relate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

I don't know, what do you think?...

---

The seed have sewn.

I'm actually somewhat interested in Nanostray, but only because of the lack of decent games on that system.

If Nanostray was released on PS2, it wouldn't get a second look.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Which is unfortunate. Nanostray is a good game, even if it's not an innovative or important one.

---

Relevance does not equal being innovative or importance. Shooters are not relevant but they are sometimes innovative for their own style of gaming and are important to the history of gaming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronPlant

This does not matter. Games should not be rated for their innovation, but for their ability to be fun for people who like the kind of genra that said game falls into.

---

I agree with this. Although EGM was correct when they said shooters (I refuse to call them shmups) aren't popular in a piece that wasn't even a review, I don't think they should rate them based on this. No other form of media is rated based on popular appeal, and we should stop doing the same with games.

Edit: IP, Nanostray isn't really innovative for its own genre, either. It's just a very solid shooter with an interesting scoring system and the nicest graphics on the DS.

Kedawa, if you like the genre I recommend picking it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Edit: IP, Nanostray isn't really innovative for its own genre, either. It's just a very solid shooter with an interesting scoring system and the nicest graphics on the DS.

---

I know, I was just commenting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kedawa

V shooters were important ten or fifteen years ago, but not anymore.

It's not exactly a genre at the forefront of innovation.

It's 2005, and people expect more out of a game then dodging arbitrary bullet patterns fired by braindead enemies.

---

OK, then. Since SMB is 20 years old it is also "no longer important/innovative."

"Braindead" enemies? You obviously have never played a Cave or Raizing shooter let alone Radiant. It's all in the enemy placement. And yes, like all genres, some devs are sloppy but then some are brilliantly meticulous with how they create the enemies and bullet patterns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronPlant

This does not matter. Games should not be rated for their innovation, but for their ability to be fun for people who like the kind of genra that said game falls into.

---

No, it totally matters.

What's the point of making a game if it doesn't do anything new or different, or at least do the same things but better?

I'm not saying that the genre is inherently outdated, but the fact that very few of its games do anything even remotely new makes it seem that way.

Why should I spend money on a gaming experience that I already played to death years ago?

I'd rather go play the vert shooters that I already own.

So they're in a meticulously placed spot to exhibit being braindead, for chaining probably.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Kedawa, if you like the genre I recommend picking it up.

---

If I can find it, I probably will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kedawa

No, it totally matters.

What's the point of making a game if it doesn't do anything new or different, or at least do the same things but better?

I'm not saying that the genre is inherently outdated, but the fact that very few of its games do anything even remotely new makes it seem that way.

Why should I spend money on a gaming experience that I already played to death a years ago?

I'd rather go play the vert shooters that I already own.

---

As long as new shooters such as Mushihime utilize the power of the PS2 well enough to spew faster and much more complicated bullet patterns, more speed and bigger bosses then are found in my older vert shmups, then that is "new enough" for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan1CC

OK, then. Since SMB is 20 years old it is also "no longer important/innovative."

---

Well, if someone released a SMB clone today, guess what? It wouldn't be important or innovative. That well has been dry for ages, and that's what kedawa is saying.

Super Mario Bros. was innovative because of what it did when it came out. If the same exact game had been released ten years later, it would be forgotten today.

Shmups are no longer innovative for gaming as a whole. Cave games might innovate within the genre, but it never breaks any barriers. It's like a nature documentary that tries a different style of narrative. It might innovate within the nature documentary boundaries, but chances are it's not going to budge cinema as a whole.

This doesn't mean they can't still be fun, of course. But trying to argue that they're innovative is futile. They're not. They have very strict parameters and tweak systems and such within those. The last game to even attempt to break out of this was Ikaruga. Which was the most successful and critically acclaimed shooter in years, coincidentally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan1CC

OK, then. Since SMB is 20 years old it is also "no longer important/innovative."

---

If nintendo was still releasing games that played like SMB, then those games would be completely insignificant.
The original SMB will always be important because it was, well, original.
EDIT: sethsez beat me to it:)

Quote:

---

"Braindead" enemies? You obviously have never played a Cave or Raizing shooter let alone Radiant. It's all in the enemy placement. And yes, like all genres, some devs are sloppy but then some are brilliantly meticulous with how they create the enemies and bullet patterns.

---

But is there really any new ground to cover in that style of play?
Apparently not, which is part of the reason these games are niche.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punky Skunk

So they're in a meticulously placed spot to exhibit being braindead, for chaining probably.

---

Wow. That made no sense at all. Carefully placed enemies which are difficult to avoid or take some practice to chain = "braindead" on the part of the devs, huh? I'm not talking FPS AI here.

Dylan, the enemies have little to no AI. They're braindead. I don't think any shooter fan would argue this. The importance it in the placement of them, and the patterns they shoot, not the AI. There's nothing incorrect about calling them braindead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kedawa

No, it totally matters.

What's the point of making a game if it doesn't do anything new or different, or at least do the same things but better?

I'm not saying that the genre is inherently outdated, but the fact that very few of its games do anything even remotely new makes it seem that way.

Why should I spend money on a gaming experience that I already played to death years ago?

I'd rather go play the vert shooters that I already own.

---

Someone who really feels that way wouldn't be reading a review about those types of games. That person isn't in the market for that kind of game to start with.

If you are in the market for a new work truck, do you want to read reviews that bitch about how the truck you are looking at doesn't get as good gas miliage as econ car, or do you want to read reviews that compare the truck to trucks from the past and trucks of other makes and price ranges?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Well, if someone released a SMB clone today, guess what? It wouldn't be important or innovative. That well has been dry for ages, and that's what kedawa is saying.

Super Mario Bros. was innovative because of what it did when it came out. If the same exact game had been released ten years later, it would be forgotten today.

Shmups are no longer innovative for gaming as a whole. Cave games might innovate within the genre, but it never breaks any barriers. It's like a nature documentary that tries a different style of narrative. It might innovate within the nature documentary boundaries, but chances are it's not going to budge cinema as a whole.

This doesn't mean they can't still be fun, of course. But trying to argue that they're innovative is futile. They're not. They have very strict parameters and tweak systems and such within those. The last game to even attempt to break out of this was Ikaruga. Which was the most successful and critically acclaimed shooter in years, coincidentally.

---

So 2D games are still fun and sometimes it is still possible for shooters to innovate at least a bit. OK. Good point. Thanks for the enlightenment.

Anyways, what Ironplant said.

This thread perfectly explains why vertical shooters are such a niche genre. If anything, it only serves to validate what was said in EGM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan1CC

Wow. That made no sense at all.

---

Making a game where the enemies are dispersed in such a way where it would take time to learn a proper shooting order creates a static game with braindead enemies, existing to be chained.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punky Skunk

Making a game where the enemies are dispersed in such a way where it would take time to learn a proper shooting order creates a static game with braindead enemies, existing to be chained.

---

As long as the game is smartly designed you still have no point. Obviously an element within a game (enemies, whatever) should exist for the purpose the gamer is supposed to execute within the environment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Dylan, the enemies have little to no AI. They're braindead. I don't think any shooter fan would argue this. The importance it in the placement of them, and the patterns they shoot, not the AI. There's nothing incorrect about calling them braindead.

---

Exactly, and if you're happy with that being the only style of vert shooter in existence, that's fine.

Some of us would like to see something a little different, like maybe fewer, smarter enemies, for a change.

Occasionally, its nice to get a prettier, more refined version of a classic game, but when that's all we ever get, the genre as a whole loses its appeal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan1CC

So 2D games are still fun and sometimes it is still possible for shooters to innovate at least a bit. OK. Good point. Thanks for the enlightenment.

---

As always, you have an amazing knack for missing the point.

Shooters can be innovative. That doesn't mean they are being innovative. They're not. Finding a zillion different things to chain hasn't been innovative for the better part of a decade, and throwing more bullets around isn't innovative either.

Quote:

---

Anyways, what Ironplant said.

---

Yes, I too agree with him. I love shooters whether they're innovative or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

This doesn't mean they can't still be fun, of course. But trying to argue that they're innovative is futile.

---

IBTN

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Dylan, the enemies have little to no AI. They're braindead. I don't think any shooter fan would argue this. The importance it in the placement of them, and the patterns they shoot, not the AI. There's nothing incorrect about calling them braindead.

---

Right, I see yours and skunk's point now. Just fronting for good execution is all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zerodash

Regardless, I find it irritating that an industry that claims to be "all grown up" and full of "mature" gamers- all gaming publications are immature dribble. :(

---

Mature Gamers?

The industry is just as mature as it ever was. Just having an abundance of bloody games doesn't mean ther industry is maturing. It's probably the opposite.

People dont care about shooters anymore. This is a fact. The hardcore over at shmups.com like to think the genre is as important and worthwhile as ever but thats simply not the case. The genre is a relic. Nobody is doing anything in the genre to make it fun or interesting to non-shooter fans. This is something I was saying years ago. Its dried up.

It had its time in the sun but that was what, fifteen years ago? Get over it, Dylan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

As always, you have an amazing knack for missing the point.

Shooters can be innovative. That doesn't mean they are being innovative. They're not. Finding a zillion different things to chain hasn't been innovative for the better part of a decade, and throwing more bullets around isn't innovative either.


Yes, I too agree with him. I love shooters whether they're innovative or not.

---

Stop putting words in my mouth. I did not say any of that.

I was just saying well crafted chaining and well designed bullet clouds in newer shooters make for an enjoyable experience for me and to me do not equate to the exact same play environment as say, Blazing Lazers.

And I already said "i'm not talking about FPS enemy AI," maybe you have a knack for missing things too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

It had its time in the sun but that was what, fifteen years ago? Get over it, Dylan.

---

Diff there is nothing wrong with dylan playing games he enjoys, even if they are old and haven't changed any from one game to the next.

He can play with lionel trains all day if he wants. It is only entertainment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan1CC

Stop putting words in my mouth. I did not say any of that.

I was just saying well crafted chaining and well designed bullet clouds in newer shooters make for an enjoyable experience for me and to me do not equate to the exact same play environment as say, Blazing Lazers.

---

And I'm saying that none of this means they're innovative. Since you seem to be taking issue with people saying they stopped being innovative ages ago, it might be nice if you'd explain why you think they still are.

Quote:

---

And I already said "i'm not talking about FPS enemy AI," maybe you have a knack for missing things too?

---

It doesn't matter what you were talking about since that was a reply to someone else's comment, whose point you also missed.

Quote:

---

He can play with lionel trains all day if he wants. It is only entertainment.

---

Well, yea, but if someone goes to him and says that Lionel Trains are yesterday's news and nobody cares about them anymore, thowing a shit fit like he's doing now isnt exactly appropriate.

Also, Dylan says in the thread title that shooters are disliked - but the writer says it is along with text games the "least popular" genre. QUITE A DIFFERENCE Dylan. Maybe you and your shmups.com buddies need to learn to comprehend the written word.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

And I'm saying that none of this means they're innovative. Since you seem to be taking issue with people saying they stopped being innovative ages ago, it might be nice if you'd explain why you think they still are.


It doesn't matter what you were talking about since that was a reply to someone else's comment, whose point you also missed.

---

All I did was reply to what kedawa said that he felt newer shooters held no interest to him compared to older vert shooters in his collection. I then replied that as long as newer games like Mushihime are more intense then that's good enough for me (IOW, I like Mushihime more than I like some of my older games) which then dovetailed into your much needed "explanation" to me that sometimes games like Ikaruga will break the mold and add new things and then went on to say that I called the entire genre in and of itself innovative...which I didn't. Since you keep throwing new follicles into the ring are there any more hairs ya wanna split or are you through?

Anyways, just reposting what I said since you're obviously too lazy or too blind to go read the original replies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

Well, yea, but if someone goes to him and says that Lionel Trains are yesterday's news and nobody cares about them anymore, thowing a shit fit like he's doing now isnt exactly appropriate.

---

I don't know what his deal is. They are not inovative in the world of games. But saying nobody cares would be wrong. If he likes them, well then somebody obviously likes them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

Also, Dylan says in the thread title that shooters are disliked - but the writer says it is along with text games the "least popular" genre. QUITE A DIFFERENCE Dylan. Maybe you and your shmups.com buddies need to learn to comprehend the written word.

---

Diff did you read the entire quote through? The over all tone was negative.

Quote:

---

Then how about a game that combines the two least popular genres on the planet-- text adventures and overhead shoot-em-ups-- into a single $65 package? The Shiki series has so much backstory behind its bulet-ridden hide that the creators actually made an adventure game based on it. And your choices in this adventure affect the difficulty and enemy setups of the shooting sections. When did shooter plots get so complicated? Beats us-- it's to the point where developers even sell a separate DVD with artwork, interviews, and original radio-drama bits. All this for a game in which you press a single button...a lot.

---

sounds like soap box bitching to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

People dont care about shooters anymore. This is a fact. The hardcore over at shmups.com like to think the genre is as important and worthwhile as ever but thats simply not the case. The genre is a relic. Nobody is doing anything in the genre to make it fun or interesting to non-shooter fans. This is something I was saying years ago. Its dried up.

It had its time in the sun but that was what, fifteen years ago? Get over it, Dylan.

---

I'm as big a shooter fan as they come, but I'm going to have to agree. Shooters are not popular, they haven't been for years, and EGM saying this is nothing new.

And frankly, I don't want them to be popular. The last thing I want is some ugly little zero with his teenager moustache asking me if I think the bees from DoDonPachi could beat the bugs from Mushihime. A lot of the kids that shit on shooters would rather play games where you nut into some girls mouth then kick her in the face. This is not a crowd I want to be lumped in with.

Anyone that doesn't like shooters, I can understand why, it's just their loss. As long as the games are still being made by the companies that know how, I'll be pleased.

Diffy, just go back to what you do best, providing cutting edge industry commentary and many fulfilled predictions. *yawn*

You should've seen the accompanying screenshots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan1CC

Diffy, just go back to what you do best, providing cutting edge industry commentary and many fulfilled predictions. *yawn*

---

Me agreeing with EGM when they say that the genre is not popular and has been a relic for years is commentary.

But I assume you can pull up some sales numbers or something to prove the genre is still red-hot and relevant, thus proving EGM and myself wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan1CC

your much needed "explanation" to me that sometimes games like Ikaruga will break the mold and add new things and then went on to say that I called the entire genre in and of itself innovative...which I didn't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kedawa

V shooters were important ten or fifteen years ago, but not anymore.

It's not exactly a genre at the forefront of innovation.

It's 2005, and people expect more out of a game then dodging arbitrary bullet patterns fired by braindead enemies.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan1CC

OK, then. Since SMB is 20 years old it is also "no longer important/innovative."

---

Do you understand the concept of implication or not?

You guys are right...EGM is dead on here...vertical shooters are just endless reiterations of the same gameplay that's been around forever.

Hey, look at those Madden scores!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crithit5000

What do you expect Dylan? It's freaking EGM, they've been known for idiot shit like this for years.

---

It came as no surprise. They can't play Giga wing worth jack shit. When reviewing it they said that you "Often can't avoid death".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mzo

Does it make you angry?

---

Sure it does. :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cowutopia

On the topic of vertical shooters: Twin Cobra is fucking me up hardcore.

---

I can coast through the first five stages of the arcade, but the Genesis one is a rough ride all the way. Choosing the easiest difficulty doesn't help. Unlike the arcade version it has a nasty AI that directs enemy fire to where it believes you're headed.

Sometimes subtle innovation is the best kind of innovation. Adding too many new spices to an already good soup can spoil it.

What Mushihime does for innovation's sake is enough- as Dylan1CC said, you get faster and more intricate enemy fire patterns. What other shooter offers an Ultra mode like this? :sneak:

Shinobi wasn't a really innovative game but that didn't stop it from being great. The gameplay borrows a ton from Rolling Thunder, only you save hostages on your way through the level. It does add some minor tweaks to the idea (better control, melee attacks, Ninjutsu, and a Shinobi bonus for not using shurikens) that do mean a lot when added up though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StriderKyo

You guys are right...EGM is dead on here...vertical shooters are just endless reiterations of the same gameplay that's been around forever.

Hey, look at those Madden scores!

---

And if someone claimed Madden was innovative, they'd be wrong. ;)

I don't see the problem. Name me a genre less popular than those two.

If EGM gave a shit about originality/innovation, they wouldn't score 9's and 10's for every NCAA/Madden game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kano on the Phone

I don't see the problem. Name me a genre less popular than those two.

---

The... maze game... genre?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kano on the Phone

I don't see the problem. Name me a genre less popular than those two.

---

All-fmv sports games.

http://www.romnation.net:81/rn/screenshots/365.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

And if someone claimed Madden was innovative, they'd be wrong. ;)

---

You obviously haven't seen the fervor surrounding the industry-revolutionizing vision cone.

Quote:

---

If EGM gave a shit about originality/innovation, they wouldn't score 9's and 10's for every NCAA/Madden game.

---

The shooter genre's biggest problems are a LOT more than just a lack originality/innovation. Play a Madden from 10 years ago and it plays nothing like a Madden now. Play a shooter from 10 years ago and its exactly the same. Its not even like the graphics have really improved. The genre is DEAD, design-wise. There's not a whole lot more anyone can do with a lone ship flying into a bunch of enemies but even if there was, its not like any developers are stepping to the plate.

Everyone is just making games with bigger chains, more shit on screen, stupid crap like that, and its just playing to the nerds - its just for the hardcore fans. And then the hardcore fans wonder why nobody likes the genre? Come on.

A few days ago I tried playing Serious Sam. I got bored by level 8. I realized I didnt want to play a 12-year old game design, as much as I loved those designs back then.

Quote:

---

Shinobi wasn't a really innovative game but that didn't stop it from being great. The gameplay borrows a ton from Rolling Thunder, only you save hostages on your way through the level. It does add some minor tweaks to the idea (better control, melee attacks, Ninjutsu, and a Shinobi bonus for not using shurikens) that do mean a lot when added up though.

---

If the whole ninja genre, since Shinobi to modern day, was nothing more than Rolling Thunder with tweaks, then we'd have the same problem. Same with any genre. If a genre does not evolve, people will get bored of it and move on. It happens all the time, and yea, there's always annoying stalwarts who claim its still the pinnacle. But they're idiots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

Me agreeing with EGM when they say that the genre is not popular and has been a relic for years is commentary.

But I assume you can pull up some sales numbers or something to prove the genre is still red-hot and relevant, thus proving EGM and myself wrong.

---

No actually I wouldn't, because I'm not a boring person like you who thinks pulling sales and industry statistics out of your anus equates to gaming discussion anybody actually cares about.

Oops, Diffy just "informed" us that shooters this year didn't sell as much as GTA. Thread over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

Play a Madden from 10 years ago and it plays nothing like a Madden now. Play a shooter from 10 years ago and its exactly the same.

---

Eh... no. The basic mechanics are the same, but the focus has definitely shifted. For the worse, in my opinion, but Psyvariar 2 and, say, Darius Gaiden have very little in common beyond the basic mechanics of the genre. I'd say it's changed about as much as Madden has, to be honest.

"Disliked" might not be a good term to describe vertical shooters and text adventures, but commercial nonfactors would fit. Can they still be fun? Yes, but the days of these types of games driving the market is long gone. I don't think the EGM editor was being hateful in the description. It's just that the writer made some poor word choices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeremy

It's just that the writer made some poor word choices.

---

you'd know about that sort of thing, wouldn't you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeremy

"Disliked" might not be a good term to describe vertical shooters and text adventures, but commercial nonfactors would fit. Can they still be fun? Yes, but the days of these types of games driving the market is long gone. I don't think the EGM editor was being hateful in the description. It's just that the writer made some poor word choices.

---

Someday you will realize that 97.3% of all game writers are fucking idiots and illiterate. Many of the remaining 2.7% have posted here at one time or another. None of them work for IGN or EGM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

None of them work for IGN or EGM.

---

This can't be stressed enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronPlant

you'd know about that sort of thing, wouldn't you?

---

Damn right.

I'd sooner expect Metallica to make another thrash album (and publicly endorse file sharing) than expect EGM to ever get within any kind of proximity of 'readable' ever again.

The funny is thing that combining a text adventure and a shooter would be really innovative. I doubt that's what the game in question here really does though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater

The funny is thing that combining a text adventure and a shooter would be really innovative. I doubt that's what the game in question here really does though.

---

Hmm...

You are fighting a midlevel boss. It is a ER-47X Mechanized Assault Craft "Bullet Spewer". Its main weapon is the Gargantuan Death Beam. It is currently charging, and is at 87% capacity, at 100% capacity, the Bullet Spewer will discharge the Gargantuan Death Beam and will destroy one of your ships in stock.

You currently have 1 Bomb and no Secondary Weapon. Your Primary Weapon is a Level 0 Wide Shot. You have no extra ships remaining, and have no continues remaining.

What do you do?

>[Pause]Up Up Down Down L R L R B A[Unpause]

That command is not recognized.

You are fighting a midlevel boss. It is a ER-47X Mechanized Assault Craft "Bullet Spewer". Its main weapon is the Gargantuan Death Beam. It is currently charging, and is at 92% capacity, at 100% capacity, the Bullet Spewer will discharge the Gargantuan Death Beam and will destroy one of your ships in stock.

You currently have 1 Bomb and no Secondary Weapon. Your Primary Weapon is a Level 0 Wide Shot. You have no extra ships remaining, and have no continues remaining.

What do you do?

>Fire Bomb

You fire your bomb. However, damage is minimal while the ER-47X Mechanized Assault Craft "Bullet Spewer" charges its Gargantuan Death Beam.

You are fighting a midlevel boss. It is a ER-47X Mechanized Assault Craft "Bullet Spewer". Its main weapon is the Gargantuan Death Beam. It has now reached 100% capacity. The Bullet Spewer discharges the Gargantuan Death Beam and destroys your aircraft.

Your ship explodes, and you are engulfed in an inferno of enemy fire and burning fuel. However, the fate of those who you fought to defend will prove far more horrible.

Game Over.

What happened to my saving throw?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revoltor

What happened to my saving throw?

---

Not until the Extra Version drops, my friend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

People dont care about shooters anymore. This is a fact. The hardcore over at shmups.com like to think the genre is as important and worthwhile as ever but thats simply not the case. The genre is a relic. Nobody is doing anything in the genre to make it fun or interesting to non-shooter fans. This is something I was saying years ago. Its dried up.

---

That depends on what kind of shooter you're talking about. Chrimson Skies is an excellent shooter and quite popular as well. REZ is somewhat innovative, yet it has a niche audience who enjoys it.

On rail shooters like Panzer Dragoon and Star Fox have brought some innovations to the genre, but with limited success.

Am I missing the reason why Dylan is childishly discarding anything Diff says with off-topic insults when everything Diff says is right on point in terms of the discussion here?

This thread has been great outside of the stubborn refusal of the thread's creator to accept what is true. I guess I don't see the need for insult bullshit flying around over a dead genre.

Quote:

---

Eh... no. The basic mechanics are the same, but the focus has definitely shifted. For the worse, in my opinion, but Psyvariar 2 and, say, Darius Gaiden have very little in common beyond the basic mechanics of the genre. I'd say it's changed about as much as Madden has, to be honest.

---

Yea... okay, fair enough, but again - they're making the games for shooter nerds. These changes are for those guys. They're not pulling any new fans into the genre. This is why its stagnated and isnt popular or relevant. EGM is right on here.

Whereas, say with FPS games (to continue my earlier example)... Half-Life expanded the genre and brought tons of new fans in. If the shooter genre people wish their genre to be relevant and popular again the people making them needs to stop making the games for the hardcore fans. But then again, maybe this isnt possible, and the genre is tapped out.

I remember saying this a couple years ago, maybe even on GG!, and I got reamed, hardcore. :cry:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreamboat Tommy

Am I missing the reason why Dylan is childishly discarding anything Diff says with off-topic insults when everything Diff says is right on point in terms of the discussion here?

---

The truth hurts. There is no other explanation.

It's like telling a kid Santa doesn't exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tommy Tallarico

Am I missing the reason why Dylan is childishly discarding anything Diff says with off-topic insults when everything Diff says is right on point in terms of the discussion here?

---

10:1 odds says this is happening because some moons and planets and shit are aligned or something.

Didn't you make the pretty noises in Earthworm Jim or something? No one buys Shiny games anymore!

<Files down a toothbrush in the event someone brings up that Matrix command line utility>