Let's take a quick look at Metacritic scores here, shall we? What follows is just about every american-released shmup that has an average score listed on Metacritic. I've selected review excerpts from most of them that pissed me off, not because they just criticized the game, but because they displayed horrible ignorance of Shmups as a genre. I in fact left out any negative review excerpts that criticized the game and made a fair point about it. I also obviously left out positive review excerpts, of which there were several for each game. Keep that in mind as you read on.
Raiden III: 61
-Review excerpts that piss me off:
"A purebred '80s throwback, Raiden III hasn't a chance of competing with exciting modern shooters - or even the classics of yesteryear."
"The game is too short, and doesn’t sport enough play options to keep it fresh past a few hours of play. "
"The game doesn't take long enough to beat, there's no real reason to play it again, and there isn't anything even remotely special about the experience."
Gradius III and IV: 64
-Review excerpts that piss me off:
"Only enjoyable if you equate fun with frustration, but most gamers have long since outgrown that philosophy, as have most games. Yet Gradius III and IV clings to its roots like a long rotting tooth."
"Two arcade perfect ports of games that will get stale within a short few minutes. Back then, way back then, this may have been revolutionary but on the PS2 it's almost like an insult to the grown intelligence of gamers."
"Meritless in terms of taking their genre forward or, worse even, invoking the warm glow of nostalgia. Spend £15 on a NES and the original games instead." (I'd like to point out that neither of these two games were on the NES. Or on any home console until this collection on the PS2, in fact. And Gradius on the NES was a joke compared to the two masterpieces of Gradius III and IV)
"Old-school graphics and unprecedented difficulty level make this one a loser for all but the most dedicated retro-game freaks. "
Chaos Field: 61, 63 (DC, GC respectively)
-Review excerpts that piss me off:
"It's like fighting a fireworks display. Sometimes the enemy blows up. Sometimes you do. There's no strategy; no hook that makes you think about how you'll do better next time."
Triggerheart Exelica: 63
-Review excerpts that pissed me off:
"Despite the enjoyment of slinging bad guys around like giant wrecking balls, Triggerheart's indecisive difficulty, average looks and short length render it a bad choice for any but the most devoted shooter fans."
"Like most arcade shooters, the experience is brief. The challenge is there for those who would like to memorize attack patterns and master the five levels, but there isn't anything that feels exciting."
"I enjoyed Triggerheart, but the game's length is both a good and bad thing -- it has only five levels, and most players will be able to beat them all in about 30 minutes."
Castle Shikigami 2: 67
Castle Shikigami 3: 67
-Review excerpts that pissed me off:
"If this were a downloadable title on WiiWare, Xbox Live Arcade, or PlayStation Network, it's a safe bet that we'd be telling you to go fire up your console and start it downloading right now."
"Castle of Shikigami III is a great title for people who enjoy the occasional classic, arcade-style game. However, it has a decided lack of content and doesn't offer much beyond the initial experience."
"The mere fact that it fills a niche on the Wii doesn't excuse this disappointing lack of substance. "
Under Defeat: 67
-Review excerpts that pissed me off:
"Inarguably, what Under Defeat does, it does very well. The execution is perfectly pitched and it clearly ticks each and every box the developers drew up on the ideas table. But it's hard to shake the feeling that this is '80s gaming dressed in '00s visuals running on '90s hardware. The gameplay is sweet and eloquent but, underneath it also tired and relentlessly derivative."
Thunder Force V: 70
Gradius Collection: 76
-Review excerpts that pissed me off:
"Twenty years ago, it would have been worth forty bucks. But today, it’s just another obsolete space ship, grounded in favor of better, faster rockets."
"If you love slow, old-fashioned gameplay, you'll be in heaven here. "
"The Gradius Collection will mainly appeal to fans who want to relive those old school memories; I can't see many new gamers being hooked on Gradius, even though it's a fun experience."
R-Type Final: 79
Gradius V: 82
-Review excerpts that pissed me off:
"Even though its more visually polished than some of the other shooters out there, the lack of innovation and the small number of seven stages makes Gradius V a must for fans of the series only."
"It's just too bad that there isn't much to it beyond the standard gameplay. "
"About the only things that keep the game from scoring higher is the lack of any meaningful innovation in the gameplay and the fact that the game only has seven stages to play."
Ikaruga: 81, 85, 88 (DC, GC, 360 respectively)
-Review excerpts that pissed me off:
"As fun as it starts out to be, it gets old rather quickly. Fortunately or unfortunately, the game is extremely short, and on its easiest mode can be completed in about an hour."
"A perfect example of why shooters have become such a niche genre. It's a good game that's well made. It's even got an interesting hook to keep the hard core happy. But the insane difficulty will keep most players from getting past the first level before giving up. And with the ultra-short playing time, even shooter fans might not find enough to like here."
Summary of Criticisms
Shmups are "retro" or "old school"; "not modern"
Shmups were once one of the top genres of games on consoles and in arcades all over the world. To this day, companies such as Cave, Seibu Kaihatsu and Alfa System continue to develop and release shmups in Japanese arcades, but in America and Europe they have become much rarer. The reason this criticism pisses me off is because new shmups are being released all the time! If you say Gradius V is a "retro throwback" and that it "isn't modern" is ridiculous because the game was released in 2004! If an average reviewer decided to play Cave's newest shmup, Dodonpachi Daifukkatsu, I can guarantee he or she would mention how it's such a "retro" game even though it came out about a month ago as of this writing! It includes new features compared to other shmups and Cave has always pushed the genre forward, albeit slowly. A game released this year cannot be "not modern."
Saying a shmup released this year is retro is like saying that one of the dozens of FPSes released last year (like Bioshock, or Half-Life 2: Episode 2, or Crysis, or CoD 4) is retro because FPSes have been around since Doom in 1993. "Hey, you walk around with a gun in a first-person perspective and shoot things," on the most basic level the most modern FPSes haven't really changed that formula. So it is with shmups. "Hey, you just fly around in a 2D plane and shoot enemies and dodge bullets," and on the most basic level modern shmups are the same. That's what a genre is!
Shmups are too short
Ugh, I hate this one. So, most shmups are between 5 and 7 stages in length (not counting loops) which usually equates to about 30-45 minutes of gameplay time to beat it in a single run. Criticizing shmups for this trait, however, shows a real ignorance about the genre and about arcade games in general. Sure, if you get a shmup and just play through it, continuing every time you get a game over, until you hit the end, you might think "wow, that was fast." But that's not how they are meant to be played. For arcade games, and shmups specifically, the aim is for high scores. To achieve the highest theoretical score, you will need to beat the entire game without using any continues because continuing resets your score each time. To truly "beat" a shmup, you need to beat it without continuing. This is called a 1CC, or "1-credit-completion." To accomplish this requires considerable skill and often memorization, but above all PRACTICE. While it's true that you can continue through a shmup in 30 minutes, to actually beat it properly by 1CCing it, will take you considerable more time. Often 20-30 hours of total play time, depending on your skill level. To put it into perspective, I played Ikaruga on the easiest possible settings for over 25 hours before 1CCing it. I don't even consider that 1CC to be legitimate because it was not done at default settings. Under default settings and in easy mode I'm lucky to even make it to level 4. I played those 5 levels over and over and over until I could survive for longer and longer, and rack up chains to get a decent score as well. I think my 1CC score was around 13 million, which is still horrible considering the world high score is around 40 million.
Anyway, my point is, properly beating a shmup takes just as much time as beating an average FPS or even some shorter RPGs. It is just ignorant to complain about how short shmups are. Playing the game right means replaying each level over and over, trying to improve your run each time and get just a little further. In fact I advise not continuing, ever. That way each time you get a little further in the game you will see new levels and areas and enemies and bullet patterns. In my experience this helps you improve faster, too.
Shmups are too hard to be enjoyable
If you're too much of a wuss to play a shmup, don't cry that the game is too frustrating. Maybe the problem is you. Seriously, keep practicing, get better, and you'll enjoy making progress. Of course shmups are hard games. That's a part of their inherent awesomeness. The entire fun comes from bettering yourself. The only time this criticism is valid is when a game is unfairly difficult and where there was nothing you could do to prevent death. A small number of shmups do fall into this catagory; namely, most things made by Psikyo and Raizing. But even those games aren't really that bad.
Shmups don't have enough content outside the main game
When was it that gamers started caring more about the extra content that come with games than they do about the games themselves? I remember when you got a game, and that was all you got. Does Contra III have online multiplayer and bonus movies and storyboards and making-of documentaries and a thousand extra levels? No, it has 6 stages and a couple difficulty levels. And it's still a FINE game. What about one of my favorites, Star Wars: Jedi Knight 2? It's a 3D PC game that came out in 2002. It featured a single player campaign, and a (amazing) multiplayer component. That's it. So why is it that shmup reviews can honestly say "The gameplay is great! It's really fun! It has a deep scoring system! But wait, the game only comes with 5 levels. It has no extra content! Waaaa! 60/100!' If the game is FUN, then that makes it a GOOD GAME.
This is like when reviewers take away points on games lacking online multiplayer. Why don't you judge the game based on what's there, not what isn't? Now, I won't complain about extra content if it's included. The recent Blast Works on the Wii features an extensive level editor and 4 other shmups that were ported from the PC, besides the main game. Hey, that's great. But I wouldn't have cried if they had only released the main game with no other extras. I've heard it's a solid shmup with improvements over its predecessor Tumiki Fighters.
My point is, extra content is a nice bonus, but really not that important.
Shmups have no storyline
So what? If I want a storyline I'll play an RPG. Or better yet, read a book. I play shmups to dodge friggin' bullets!
Time to end this rant in the way any shmup-related article should end: with this immortal quote from Winston Churchill:
"There is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at without result."
3 comments:
I think you have a lot of valid points and to a certain extent i totally agree with you, most of the reviewers have no taste. All that said shmups have become a bit of a cult genre and people have been complaining about them for years, even during the megadrive days the magazines used to complain about shmups being unoriginal and old fashioned. This will never change and ot be honest the best thing to do it not bother reading the reviews, read forums or sites that share your interest instead.
The thing is i quite like the fact that these games aren't mainstream, its kind of nice to get excited about playing the latest cave shooter rather than just another generic fps with online gameplay featuring the most foul mouthed idiotic members of the American youth. Shmups are proper games, they don't need bloat like stories and cut scenes, they don't need extras, features etc because the core gameplay is good enough on it own, but you have to be a decent gamer to appreciate that, which is a rarity in this day and age.
Well said! And regarding this "lack of substance" that seems to dog shmups in the mainstream press...
I can accept shmups are, in a sense, relatively basic games - in that they usually provide the player a simple set of tools, those tools often not radically changed from the genre's earlier days.
But the genre's performance focus practically nullifies this point. A good shmup, including some of the ones called "short" and "lacking of substance" above, will often demand far greater feats of practiced skill using these tools than other singleplayer genres could ever ask. Few other 1P genres can match the sheer performance ceiling of shmups, and few would even try to these days.
And this isn't even considering head-to-head scoring competition, which can increase a shooter's challenge and depth tremendously, long after a 1CC and decent score is achieved. Ignoring this is much like ignoring the head-to-head aspect of fighting games.
The general marking down of shmups as "short" and "lacking content" compared to other genres is ignorance, plain and simple. It's one thing to say the disciplined, often narrowly-focused process of mastering a shooter is not for everyone (it isn't; and obviously, no genre's appeal is universal).
But pretending that this genre is characteristically "short" and "doesn't offer much beyond the initial experience" is either ignorance or dishonesty. Faulty journalism either way. I'm sure it'd be amusing to see such reviewers actually play a few of these allegedly short, shallow games.
The reviews still have some things right, like it or not. Namely...
Shmups are a niche genre for hardcore freaks/enthusiasts.
Unfortunately, this is so. It is not unlikely for an average joe gamer to be hooked on one, but they usually don't follow the genre development unless they become enthusiasts themselves. Until then they need a hardcore friend or other influential person to unveil the beauty of a certain shmup.
Many shmups are not just hard, but frustrating to play.
Yes, and Gradius III is one of them. How many people do you think have looped it, of all shmup fans? Somehow I'm sure there would be more of them if the game wasn't such an asshole to the player in the first place. Not even all the hardcore shmuppers consider it fun, let alone the newcomers.
Shmups are too hard to be enjoyable.
Apparently, this is exactly so for a lot of people who just can't bring themselves to play one game over and over. Especially if the game is clearly beyond their abilities. Unfortunately, there are more such players than all of us would hope.
A good part of the problems with various reviews is that they are written by people of a certain mindset for the people with the same mindset. So when a player of a different mindset reads such reviews, they are left baffled at best. But for the audience, it can all come together perfectly.
Post a Comment