Arcade games had a fraction the length and bloat of a AAA game, but orders of magnitude more depth, challenge, and replayability.
What went so horribly wrong? How do we go back to focusing on gameplay and less on cinematics, skinner-box grinding, handholdy combat, and fetch quests?
>but orders of magnitude more depth
Go on, I'm listening.
> challenge
Ok.
>and replayability
Because 1) you didn't beat it or 2) it was a racing/fighting game which is still the same in terms of replayability in the modern era
People who say this can't beat a single level without using 500 save states.
>What went so horribly wrong?
Arcade genres are the most copypasted samey genres to ever exist. Zero innovation is what went wrong.
post clears shitter
Go back to sucking off your favorite youtuber on xitter.
>the most gameplay dense and skill intensive games BAD
>derivative braindead AAA movieslop GOOD
lol kys zoomer moron
Flying a tiny hitbox down a linear on rails hallway is boring gameplay. It's also extremely easy gameplay to make, hence there's so many boring shmups in this world.
Educate yourself shitter
Imagine if you could come up with your own opinions and thoughts.
>post braindead shitter drivel
>expect me to actually take time to spoonfeed a shitter on why he is moronic about a genre he's barely played
nah, you're a fricking zoomer moron homosexual, eat shit
I'm sure it's pure coincidence you only started thinking arcade games were the peak of game design after watching youtube videos about it.
I've been playing arcade adjacent indie and AA games for decades, but eventually you require something more challenging, more distilled, which sets you down the arcade rabbit hole and you realize these games are peak of 2D action.
But if you're a shitter whose only experience is walkie talkie sections in nu Onions of War, you have a long ways to go and it's like trying to explain something in a foreign language.
>but eventually you discover a youtube channel with opinions that make you feel superior to others for liking bad games, then you repeat their opinions nonstop
You're far from the first person to do this.
Why are you so obsessed with youtubers you zoomer homosexual? not everyone is some parasocial reject who gets all their opinions from their favorite eceleb.
>Why are you so obsessed with youtubers you zoomer homosexual?
You literally linked to a youtube video a few posts ago, the same one you blatantly get all your opinions from.
Ok but describe the "orders of magnitude more depth".
What games are you comparing?
>"wah wah why doesn't the IGN man understand God Hand"
>"lol fricking cancerous journos want an easy mode in From Software games. want a diaper change, you little b***hes?"
>"lol consoleshitters are casualizing gaming cuz uh, Halo has smaller weapon loadouts than PC games"
>immediately morph into the IGN man as soon as your elitism is met with a higher form of elitism with stronger fundamental values and understanding of game design
I like Mike cuz he just says what I've been saying here since 2008 when you guys were crying about "linearity" in games, treating boring CRPGs as peak "hardcore" gaming & somehow viewed PC games as the peak of "hardcore" design even though the PC audience is so averse to mechanical & spacial mastery they consider the lack of a manual quicksave to somehow be a really bad thing
like, holy shit, PC gamers consider the Turok 1 remaster of all things to be too hard cuz you actually have to engage with the game's pacing instead of brute forcing through the smallest of challenges
God Hand is casual dogshit though. Checkpoints every screen, QTEs, cutscene attacks and scaling difficulty.
it's still a console game with strong arcade fundamentals. yeah it's not gonna be on the same level of difficulty you get from Final Fight or singleplayer Spikeout but easier, more mass-appeal console & PC action games would still be immensely better if they followed those design principles.
the problem is when people get high & mighty over game journos "not understanding" a "hardcore" console game & then talk about the arcade games that inspired it like you're an EGM guy from the mid 90s who thought 2D games were now useless, or that the more buttons a game uses the deeper it is. industry cheerleader technophiles who treated games as hardware showcases and not games.
>PC action games would be immensely better if they were designed more unfairly to steal quarters
why do you think "you had to pay money for arcade games" is an epic logic-own? do you think "one quarter per try", meaning someone could just walk away from a game that's obviously unfair and shitty after spending 25 cents, somehow facilitated a worse sense of game design & difficulty than what we have now?
The business model of arcade games incentives ridiculous difficulty spikes and randomness. The more it taps into someone's addictive gambling brain the better.
the very nature of gambling requires a random outcome. arcade games are essentially the same every time & variance depends on your own actions as a player. you don't get more gameplay-per-credit out of a Darius game because the game offered you a luckier RNG; you get it by understanding the game better & better.
>B...BUT THAT'S JUST MEMORIZATION!
why do you think a newcomer's first run of a shmup that just came out is gonna be vastly different from a veteran's? if the games are just about memorization then the basic transfer of skill that facilitated the evolution of the genre (or something like Capcom beat-em-ups) would not exist!
>arcade games are essentially the same every time & variance depends on your own actions as a player
Clearly has never played Final Fight.
I've been playing it obsessively for the past month! it's one of the best possible examples of good arcade beat-em-up design where everything is predictable & you just need to find optimal strategies & make smart split-second decisions! where the hell do you even find randomness in Final Fight?
You are beyond delusional if you think the game is remotely fair. It's the most RNG filled piece of unfair bullshit ever made.
cool, give me some examples.
Why? So you can give me your guru wisdom on what I should do like I don't already know. The game is complete bullshit, it doesn't matter if you know exactly what is supposed to happen when the game just decides it's going to win.
the fact that you can't even explain yourself, can't even give me ONE example of a death you can reasonably blame on RNG, just proves my point that you guys are the IGN God Hand review guy with some extra steps. you turn to the exact same empty dismissal when you're met with a slightly higher level of difficulty.
I'll even toss you a bone & say that certain Andore & Bill Bull appearances can catch you off-guard the first time... but they never appear randomly.
I already know exactly how this kind of exchange plays out and I'm not interested in hearing pro gameplay tips from someone worse than I am at the game.
Here's what superplayer Scoop Arcade (beat Final Fight Hardest nomiss with Guy) had to say about the randomness in the game
tl;dr: shut the frick up shitter
>dude trying to get the hardest possible experience out of the game with insane dip switch settings making small, normally manageable variances in enemy behavior take on new meaning
you're right, final fight is a slot machine.
>normally manageable variances in enemy behavior
Once again, clearly has never played Final Fight.
as I said, I've been playing it for a month on normal mode (without going out of my way to do an insane challenge run that only an arcade operator who hates money would've forced on the players) and I never feel like my deaths are the
game's fault
>uhh sometimes barrels will contain extra health adding on top of the already carefully placed & consistent health pickups and sometimes they might not
>uhhh sometimes an enemy might do this attack and sometimes they might not
am I really supposed to agree this somehow turns the game into a slot machine
can either of you give me a single example of "unfair slot machine design" without appealing to "trust me bro" or "this guy went out of his way to do the hardest challenge run possible"
I'm not giving you an example just so you can't play pretend expert and give advice on what you totally would have done in that scenario.
>I'm not interested in hearing pro gameplay tips from someone worse than I am at the game
show me your run lol
Even if I had one recorded right now I still wouldn't upload it. If for no other reason than to deny you the opportunity to give advice about a game you know nothing about.
ok fine, I was exaggerating cuz your slot machine comparison pissed me off so I took the other extreme stance. sure, stuff like Sodom's attacks can be annoying (which is why 1CCers tend to glitch him or use the picking up swords exploit) and random health item drops do play a role (even if the really important health drops are always gonna be there). the problem though is very few games are really perfect, whether hard or not, and a game that's already kicking people's asses is gonna get extra criticism - meaning if a design flaw plays a significant role in maybe 1 out of 20 deaths then the whole game is useless and terrible. this hugely discourages people from making really hard games at all.
Spikeout for example can have camera issues. I can't really lie about that. but most people crying about it in Yakuza threads just suck at it period.
how about you just post your clears shitter so we can laugh at you
what even is your stance on final fight? did you take my simplified takes on randomness as far as its impact on normal gameplay goes as an excuse to show off your knowledge of youtube descriptions or do you actually agree it's somehow a slot machine & mastery plays little role in how well you do
>pc audience is averse to mechanical and spacial mastery
There's plenty of popular competitive multiplayer games on PC that require more mastery to reach high levels than the vast majority of arcade games. Getting a high score in some shmup where the leaderboard has 10 people total doesn't compare to winning a big moba tournament.
if PC gamers are so hardcore in multiplayer why can't they wrap their head around the Turok remaster? that's a game babies played on their N64s. what's causing this immense shift between obsessive hardcore behavior in multiplayer and needing to savescum every second in singleplayer? if you can wrap your head around other players' decisions in real time then surely you should be able to figure out scripted challenges also programmed by human beings.
>opinions and thoughts.
if i say 2+2 = 4 and show an example from a textbook, am i wrong?
name 50
Literally nothing exists that matches Virtual-ON.
The good news about arcadey games is that they’re usually cheap, easy, and great for beginners. Why don’t you start, OP? Make the next Xeno Crisis or Super Crate Box.
Can you go one single post without projecting your AAA obsession onto anyone who tells you shmups are a shitty genre?
>shmups are a shitty genre
in reality it's just you who are the shitter.
This thread wasn't even about shmups, it was about arcade games, which also include platformers, run and guns, beat em ups, stack em ups, racers, gallery shooters, etc.
They pretty much stopped making anything but shmups and fighting games in the arcades by the mid 90s. It was simply cheaper and easier to make games with no level design than ones with it. Plus both genres generate the most money. There wasn't any consideration besides that.
>shmups don't have level design
KEK shitter moment
>this straight line with enemies flying at the player is totally level design
It's the worst level design of all time then.
mark talks about this in his shmup documentary. Autoscrolling forces you to play aggressively and keeps the pressure continually on you. Whereas self-scrolling games have to use a lot of tricks and methods to prevent you from just screen inching.
>mark talks about this in his shmup documentary.
I literally could not give less of a frick. Autoscrollers suck and are lazy, doubly so if the game itself is just a hallway.
>muh hallways
you guys haven't changed at all since the 2000s. you think you're hot shit but you never in your life stopped and thought "maybe a game can feature mechanical exploration instead of environmental exploration". your knowledge of game design begins and ends with a picture comparing Doom maps to CoD maps & deciding the former is "better" because it's less linear; you don't even understand what actually makes Doom good!
>mechanical exploration
Such as.
playing around with multiple ways of approaching a situation. taking into account everything from your basic attacks & movement to the level layout, the enemies' unique movement & attack patterns, their synergies and above all else how it all comes together. versus "ahhhh I can explore the world and go anywhere I want... so relaxing..."
in the simplest possible terms, do you really not see how a shoot-em-up where you can move ANYWHERE across the screen & where bullet routes vary depending on where you are can facilitate a wealth of strategies & split-second decisions? and that's completely ignoring scoring systems.
>do you really not see how a shoot-em-up where you can move ANYWHERE across the screen & where bullet routes vary depending on where you are
Imagine this guy's head fricking explodes when he discovers fricking 3D Super Mario.
3D Mario doesn't involve a ton of split-second decisions at all. the game allows you to go anywhere you want but doesn't DEMAND any form of advanced movement; the platforming is very basic & nothing in the game requires you to very seriously experiment with your motion. this is why people get bored of playing normally pretty quick and, after decades of trying to squeeze "content" out of the game, had their brains so broken by self-imposed challenges they had a giant meltdown when Nintendo removed speedrunning exploits that were just programming mistakes to begin with.
I love Mario 64 but come the frick on dude.
like shmups dont have self imposed challenges? 1cc is all about self imposing a challenge.
>1cc is all about self imposing a challenge.
zoomer moron moment
>this thing the entire game is built around is a self-imposed challenge
you complete and utter moron
youre not required to 1cc unless you want super secret ending or to dick mesure on the internet. Even Mario youre not required to get all the stars to beat.
You're right. 1cc gives you better score though, so by design thr games encourage you to go for it and beyond it.
every single design element of a shmup exists to make it clear to even the world's biggest moron that 1CCing is the reason it exists. there is nothing in Mario 64 telling you to beat it as fast as possible and the game is not designed around it in the slightest.
shumps arent designed to have you beat it as fast as possible. its a set speed, dipshit. Mario isnt designed to be bewt as fast as posssible, but its emergent gameplay allows it because youre not on a fricking railroad. You have more freedom to do more and find more tricks out.
I'm not saying shmups encourage you to play fast; I'm comparing playing for score with playing for time because that's the main way to compete in Mario 64 these days and the primary means of milking it among the larger gaming audience.
"shmups have no emergent gameplay" is moron shit. players pretty often discover shit the devs didn't intend.
I've never once in my life thought to force myself to do the video game equivalent of homework because some youtuber said it was the peak of gaming.
>mark talks about this
Lmao, you on a first name basis with him? That your boyfriend? homosexual, gtfooh.
>but orders of magnitude more depth
C'mon man, I lived in arcades in the 90s and I can't name a game with "depth".
>challenge
By design. If you can beat a game on 25c, why would you ever play it again? Why would you play it in front of an audience? Arcades were social places.
>replayability.
Goes back to challenge. If there's room for improvement and there's some social status to be gained from being better, you're going to keep playing try and be the best.
>What went so horribly wrong?
Tech made it pointless to drive to an arcade and put coins in a machine to play good video games. Solo games took over the home-game market and the arcade experience faded away.
>C'mon man, I lived in arcades in the 90s and I can't name a game with "depth".
yeah you're the same as the boring millennial game journalists who cried about Metal Slug in the 90s having "no replayability" cuz you can credit-spam through it. age means nothing; you guys existed then and you still do now.
but ok, sure. name like 3 particularly deep games and explain your idea of depth
nta, but
team fortress 2
mechanical complexity
titanfall 2
mechanical complexity
overwatch 2
mechanical complexity
metal slug and scroller shooters are fun but they dont have shit on the complexity of even a basic fps like cs2
>metal slug and scroller shooters are fun but they dont have shit on the complexity of even a basic fps like cs2
but yet you can't clear them shitter
you didn't answer my question gay
You are a shitter. I don't respond seriously to shitters.
Either post clears or frick off.
is using this "I'm too chickenshit to use slurs" insult in every post you make your idea of avatargayging
>NOOOOO you can't use words that actually mean something you have to say Black persontroonyhomosexual because reddit said Ganker is the site for edgy boys
what does "shitter" even mean. 8 year old boy insult
Lurk more, newbie.
I've been here since 2005 I still have no fricking idea why people think "shitter" is a good insult now
>"This game is essentially an unplayable piece of shit where player skill doesn't matter but you need to have 1CCed it to give your opinion on it"
What?
anon how am i supposed to probe i have or haven't on here, i will now tell you i have 1cc'd all metal slugs and scroller shooters blindfolded. you literally cant prove i didnt
this post isnt me, you fricking schizo
yes, this is true. get mad about it i guess lol
sounds like you have a very pseudointellectual view of game design
coming from the moron who thinks a contra clone has depth beyond the pretty pixels?
so mechanical complexity can only exist in multiplayer games?
what those games lack in cs' gameplay depth they make up for with immediate fun factor, something cs sorely lacked because the appeal of the series was primarily about playing on a team.
>but orders of magnitude more depth, challenge, and replayability
Not really. All they had was challenge which was by design to keep people inserting coins. But it was a cancerous monetization practice, which is why arcades have mostly died out
what made it cancerous?
Home console market changed the standard of the industry at the time. People realised they would prefer to pay for a product they'd rather own.
big difference between "I'd rather own the game" and "coin-op is inherently cancerous"
Not really
whenever i see people stroking their own dicks about how the games they like are sooooo hard and mechanically complex and require so much skill i wonder why they didn't put that drive to improve and be "the best" toward something practical
it's not impressive when you call me bronze or tell me to post 1ccs after i say this btw, also not shitting on people who like to really get into a game and master it, but rather on this misplaced sense of pride that skill circlejerkers have
You have zero experience in the genre, or even anything adjacent. What makes you think your opinion is relevant in any way?
The platform is dead. You clearly weren't an expert
here. I don't think my opinion is relevant. I'm legitimately curious what yours is.
i played a bit of touhou once, it was fun
i'm also not really giving my opinion on "the genre" or anything like that, i'm mostly giving my opinion on you, as an individual, and your type of person generally: my opinion is that you're pathetic and your overweening pride in a useless skill is misplaced
>i played a bit of touhou once, it was fun
as if you couldn't make yourself look any worse.
kys secondary turd world zoomer
how's the job search coming
considering you've posted tranime for two posts now, you tell me
anime website
also we're not talking about me, we're talking about how you wasted your youth honing twitch movements and muscle memory of a select few video games instead of learning to write software or fix a car or write a story or draw or something
>wasted your youth
lmao, in the amount of time the average person plays CSGO, or CoD, or Fortnite, or TF2, or a MOBA, you could clear many hundreds of games and have a much more fun and satisfying experience.
For a terminally online brainrotten zoomer with muh chronic fatigue syndrome, maybe you struggle to grasp that.
i guess
the reason i'm trashing you and not them is because you're the one in front of me bloviating about how your chosen entertainment is svper skillfvl and mechanically deep. i trash asshomosexuals players and shootergays and fightan Black folk when they do the same thing because i find the entire idea of beating your chest because you specced into playing a specific kind of video game and not into doing anything useful to be an inherently ridiculous and pathetic behavior
zoomers are pushing 30 btw, you will never be young again
this is the opinion of everyone who's uninitiated to any of these kinds of skillgay genres and it's never really true, there is usually something to be mastered
you should still say it though because it makes skillBlack folk seethe
>DOOD YOU SHOULD NOT TAKE PRIDE IN YOUR HOBBY
>DOOD YOU SHOULD NEVER STRIVE TO BE GOOD AT ANYTHING
>DOOD JUST WORK THE MINIMUM WAGE 9 TO 5, EAT GOYSLOP, LIVE IN THE POD, AND CONSUME POZZED NETFLIX GARBAGE
holy frick you are pathetic.
You should absolutely strive to be good at things. Not video games, though, that's pathetic.
>DOOD I LOVE WORKING OUT!! *walks on treadmill for 30 minutes watching Netflix"
>DOOD I LOVE COOKING!! *heats up a pre-cooked meal*
>DOOD I LOVE FILM!! *watches exclusively capeshit and potty humor movies*
Imagine being this pathetic. Funny enough, it's actually mostly neets with this mentality. Despite all their free time, they lack the motivation to actually do anything or be good at anything, and just piss away their time on the internet, sleeping, jerking off, or mindlessly consuming goyslop entertainment.
No matter what video game you git gud at, it's the equivalent of getting good at walking on a treadmill. Get a real talent or shut the frick up.
>get a real talent
how the frick is that going to continue your bloodline moron? Have children and then you can do whatever the frick you want in your free time.
Yeah you can do what ever you want, just don’t pretend you’re doing anything more than consooming.
why are zoomers so pathetic and defeatist?
Define a "real talent"
Something that’s not just “consume product except like… really efficiently”
Competing against other humans isn't just "consuming a product efficiently."
The game is the product
Playing is the consuming
Winning against your opponent means you did it more efficiently(faster, higher score, whatever the metric)
people have been competing in games since ancient times moron.
>N-NOOOOO THIS IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT'S AN ELECTRONIC GAME AND A PRODUCT AND /misc/ TOLD ME CONSUME PRODUCT BAD!!!
brainrot moment
There have been talentless hacks since ancient times too
Correct
Chess and basketball aren’t real talents, but buying the equipment isn’t the reason in this case.
>The game is the product
This is true of all games, including chess, all sports, etc.
Is chess not a real skill because people buy the pieces? Is basketball not a skill because someone is selling the ball?
/misc/ has rotted your brain kek. zoomers are so fricking stupid and easily impressionable
like i said
i don't think there's anything bad about building skill and learning a game's systems but i find the dickmeasuring vanity to be extremely pathetic. it's unpleasant in any hobby or craft but it's especially pathetic when the hobby in question is pushing buttons real good
do you know how to do anything useful or do you just have a bunch of 1cc screenshots?
will you will those screenshots to your children?
i don't totally agree that it's wrong to strive to be good at video games, i'm mostly attacking the vainglory
No one is dickmeasuring. At the end of the day, it's just fun and satisfying. The appeal of arcade games and similar games is in learning and mastering their systems.
The issue is that these communities are plagued with secondaries, shitters, and posers. These disingenuous fake experts pollute the discussion with garbage. A lot of the drivel they spew is baffling to the actual player, but upon the realization that they are just a larping shitter, you can just ignore them.
t. larping shitter
>usually something to be mastered
Sure, you can master everything with enough autism. But games don't exist in a vacuum and we can compare beat em ups to platformers or fighting games and see that they tend to be pretty shallow in comparison.
Still true today, I'm amazed there are autists who try to "master" the utterly broken combat of Yakuza games. What an absurd thing to waste your time on
fighting games are an unfair comparison since they're multiplayer focused. apples and oranges.
platformers, lol give me a break. your average capcom beat em up wipes the floor with your average mario in terms of mechanical depth
yeah yakuza sucks and is just a lesser version of spikeout. glad you agree!
>fighting games are an unfair comparison
Tekken did both beat em up levels and 1 on 1 fighting, I don't see what's the big difference, it worked.
>platformers, lol give me a break
So many beat em ups try to introduce depth by copying platformer mechanics though. You had those stupid jumping puzzles in Ninja Gaiden arcade and Double Dragon NES for example, always horrible. And then you have games like Splatterhouse which I'm still not sure if that's a platformer or a beat em up, it's just perfectly inbetween
why do you think all your examples come from the same era? Capcom, Sega, Konami beat-em-ups abandoned that stuff throughout the 90s cuz it doesn't actually facilitate depth as much as focused Final Fight-style mechanics focused on what makes the genre fun. that's the formula that's still being copied to this day. does Streets of Rage 4 have DD2-style stupid platforming?
>anime website
People come to this board to talk about video games, moron. People aren't forced to like your crappy anime.
don't care didn't ask, anime website
Nobody wants to go back. All the arcade genres have been done to death. Do you need another shmup? Well have you played all the old ones? There's too many of them already, it's been done, we still get like 5 new decent shmups a year and that's enough.
Beat em ups, those are dead. Good, it was a shit genre.
Fighting games, that's still going and nothing about those is different.
Racing games, now that one is in a slump but again, we have too many and they're all kind of the same. Do we really need that many more
But do we really need more souls likes?
We don't have remotely as many soulslikes as we have, say, 2D fighting games. There are hundreds of 2D fighting games that are completely forgotten and nobody gives a frick. Same with SHMUPs, literal hundreds of them, and I'm not even counting indie shovelware ones.
>Beat em ups, those are dead. Good, it was a shit genre.
why
Button mashing coin munchers that offer no real depth
if they have no depth that means you could easily 1cc singleplayer spikeout or final fight right. maybe watch a few 1cc videos, memorize the levels, simple.
That's not what depth means, you fricking moron. A rhythm game that requires you to be frame perfect when you press a button would be impossibly hard, but it still wouldn't have any depth. Depth means you have a lot of options and systems to learn, not that the game requires you to press a handful of buttons very, very precisely.
arcade games don't require that, you're just a shitter
>omg this game has so much depth because I can use le blue sword or le pink hammer or le green axe!!!
That's not depth dumbass, that's just bloat. Very few games (at least AAA ones) have actual meaningful depth, it's usually just lazy content bloat with no regard for balance, risk reward, or overall quality of content.
Final Fight has a lot of options to learn
good thing beat em ups aren't remotely comparable to rhythm games and have a ton of ways of attacking & spacing
>Depth means you have a lot of options and systems to learn,
Not necessarily, things like chess and go have very simple rules and complexity emerges from them regardless. They're multiplayer games so it's a poor comparison, but really it boils down to how many meaningful difficult decisions you have to make over a period of time. Beat em ups are really about positioning and crowd control while being highly punishing if you neglect those aspects so it's pretty decision intensive
Depth and difficulty are different things. There's no depth to shoving 10 steel balls up your ass but the difficulty of doing this task is still extremely high
homie watch some 1ccs. people use their full arsenal & move in a variety of ways meaning you can make meaningful choices with a variety of inputs
modern "hardcore" games seen as "breaths of fresh air" involve far more "simon says" motions than an arcade beat-em-up let alone a shmup. including From games
Now name which arcade games you've played more than five minutes. People almost always move from indie to arcade/retro, not the other way around. Curious.
>let alone a shmup
But shmups are way deeper than beat em ups. Every beat em up is pretty much the same game of
>figure out the exact amount of pixels you need to be away from the enemy and the exact frame of their animation that you need to start your punch on
and that's basically it for every single beat em up, they didn't come up with anything else meaningful in the entire genre
I said "let alone" to imply shmups have more depth. BUT...
>figure out the exact amount of pixels you need to be away from the enemy and the exact frame of their animation that you need to start your punch on
this is fricking moronic dude. try to 1cc any arcade beat em up with that mindset, even something piss easy like Dynamite Deka 2, and you'll get your ass handed to you; it's clear you haven't actually tried to get good at any of them. you didn't even mention throws for crowd control which is the most basic shit; so I gotta come to the conclusion you're only saying this because shmups have a relatively huge English-language playerbase to whiteknight them and beat-em-ups don't. i.e. you let others decide for you what to think instead of actually playing games.
>throws for crowd control
Man the kind of shit people parade around as deep mechanics where there are none. What else should I mention, the obligatory jump kick? Or that pipe that you can pick up? Those mechanics all suck. You can defend them all you want but the genre is dead because everyone agrees they suck
still immensely deeper than From Software combat which is the golden standard for action games now & is far more guilty of the memorization-based design you attribute to arcade games. almost like general audiences don't really care about depth!
weird how mainstream players are suddenly right, after years of Halo is epic consolized failcancer despite selling way better than "hardcore" FPSes. is Fortnite the best game out now?
>is Fortnite the best game out now?
Let's see
>pure gameplay
>fast-paced movement
>advanced movement and combat techniques
>projectile weapons
>impossible win odds, if you died once you didn't beat the game
It's like description of dream boomer game (only boomers don't actually want any of this, boomers only talk but when face hardcore gameplay they cry).
>What went so horribly wrong?
Women are the biggest audience for games now. And arcade style games are far too hard for that demographic.
>wahhhh, why wont all vidya cater to my extremely niche tastes
stop being such a fricking snowflake anon. if you want tens if thousands of arcade games you havent played or ever heard of, learn japanese, move to japan. or continue to be a worthless whiny little b***h on here instead, your choice.
>What went so horribly wrong?
Arcades died and you have one samegay itt who can't let go
The game:
>pushing the right buttons at the right times to accomplish on-screen objectives
Not the game:
>watching cutscenes
>meeting a bunch of characters
>following the plot
>visual customization
The games weren't better they just had less window dressing
so, uh, you be saying that a game designed specifically to milk you out of coins as much as possible is designed with challenge and replayability in mind? WOAH MAMA, what a shocker!
so the "coin munching" model actually makes for well-designed difficulty? glad you agree
if by "well-designed" you mean artificial difficulty and faux replayability for the sake of increased profits, then yes
do you seriously think shmups have artificial difficulty
ITT: Ganker is blissfully unaware that ricmaria and the rest of the /shmupg/ rejects are shitposting. Take a good look at them. This is what happens when you get chased off your topic thread for being pathological liars. You end up having to spam
>post clears shitter
in every thread you can, desperately hoping you run into someone who doesn't already know you're full of shit
ok guy who says shitter a lot I'll apologize for over-simplifying final fight's design and downplaying the randomness that is there in an attempt to counter equally exaggerated statements that "arcade games are gambling"
it's still way more skill than randomness-based still at least in normal playthroughs
>arcade
>challenge
...generally deliberately designed to make you pum in as many quarters as possible.
The arcade version of TMNT Turtles in Time literally had a timer for if you were alive for too long, which will drop a bomb that insta-kills your character.
Modern beat-em-up games are not designed like old-school arcade beat-em-ups anymore for good reason.
>timer
*hidden timer
>using Turtles in Time as your example that "beat em ups are bad", a game with randomized throws specifically made for America and its dogshit arcade culture where you can trick stupid kids into playing unfair games cuz "I wanna play as the Ninja Turtles and Bart Simpson"
dude that's like saying Mario is shit cuz I Wanna Be The Guy exists. America also turned The Simpsons into unplayable unfair dogshit. look at the differences between the US & Japanese versions; it's insane what they did to it https://tcrf.net/The_Simpsons_(Arcade)#Gameplay
Vendetta came out around the same time. Also by Konami. play that and Turtles in Time back-to-back and the difference in fairness is immense. For the record the SNES version of Turtles in Time is great... and guess what, THAT version came out in Japan. almost like America is entirely to blame for the "coin munching" myth cuz players were stupid and corporations took advantage of it.
Speaking as someone who grew up in arcades and grinding "hard" games - when you turn into an adult and take on a career that requires a lot of mental energy, learning complex and precise gameplay on top of that becomes exhausting. The majority of good players leave the scene after graduating from school and work full time, because they can't lazily BS their way through a real job. Very few people can balance both, and most of the time it's unsustainable for more than a year or two.
Anyway, the only games of that caliber that ever get touched in an arcade in this day and age are rhythm and fighting games. Shmups have been dead for years and everything else is kiddy mobileshit ports or more traditional games like skee-ball and claw machines. I do like a good rail shooter once in a while though.
basically this. what do you care more about, making money and keeping your job, or pleasing the 5 turboautist NEETs that haven't moved on from the same 20+ year old game?
Its that fricking youtuber making this thread again about "muh density".
He never argues, he just calles everyone a shitter while forcing his meme word.
I don't think Mark has that big of a Jekyll & Hyde mental illness to go back and forth from "reasonable-but-snarky normie" to "extremely low-tier Ganker shitposter"
>Ganker has a giant history of championing player skill and dunking on "casuals"
>sudden 180 to "skill is for fricking losers" when a guy on youtube says "arcade shmups, beat-em-ups and run & guns have more depth than most modern games"
I hope this dude breaks all of your stupid play-doh brains and you all turn into "dark souls needs to have an easy mode to fight ableism"/"dean takahashi did nothing wrong" people
Becoming the best at popular modern competitive games requires more effort than becoming the best at any shmup. I say this as a big fan of all those genres you listed. There's nothing wrong with loving these games, and they do require a lot of skill and have plenty of depth. But they're not the only types of games with that element, and that sort of skill-based gameplay isn't the only thing gaming has to offer even though it's great fun.
I didn't watch the video in OP and will not.
>Becoming the best at popular modern competitive games requires more effort than becoming the best at any shmup.
lmao, shut the frick up dumb shitter. You have zero experience in shmups so your opinion is not relevant at all. Superplayers have been playing these games for decades and have tens of thousands of hours in them. You are out of your depth.
>superplayers
All 20 of them lmao
You're frustrated by my post because you know it's true. Win a major tournament in a popular game and we'll be impressed more.
>and we'll be impressed more.
>caring about the opinions of shitters
KEK
Cope post
>frick i lost the argument
>better just start spamming shitter again like i do on shmupg
jej
I never was big on big online multiplayer games so I can't comment one way or the other, but you could very well be right. that's not what most people ITT are saying though, is it? you got a community that never shuts up about how pandering to shitty players is ruining games suddenly screaming "artificial difficulty" at shmups & beat em ups or having whiny existential crises about whether being good at games even matters.
it's like back in 2017 when Icycalm, after building his entire online persona around being a difficulty-first elitist, had a giant meltdown when his shmup scoring ability was brought into question and suddenly "getting good at video games is for fricking losers, frick you".
>that's not what people itt are saying
You might be right, I skimmed some posts and I'm just shitposting on my phone in bed. Not really paying attention.
Icycalm was quite the character.
I read Icycalm's "why scoring is for homosexualS" hulkout essay then just a few days later searched the archive for some of Electric Underground's videos to see what the general consensus was & saw all of Ganker have the *exact same* immediate 180 turn that goes against their entire carefully constructed image as a "community"
Ok, fine, maybe high-level multiplayer FPSes require more work. Doesn't make what's going on in these threads any less embarrassing.
Yeah I know what you mean, it's pretty silly. Just Ganker being Ganker.
Arcade games were the gacha games of their times
arcade games are about mastery; you get more out of every credit the better you get at the game
gambling by its very nature is random
next!
Classic arcade games are the opposite of gacha and gaas if anything.
Someday I might just quit playing other games and dedicate myself to getting a 2 loop clear of Parodius Da
NA contractors pureposely asked devs to make their own arcade cabinets harder, not understanding that they were already finely balanced to be as difficult as possible but still fun and engaging enough to make the players come back.
tl;dr: american and israelites ruined them, also normalgays
that's one part I think the Electric Underground guy is missing. he seems very averse to any commentary that might have a sociopolitical bent beyond "boobs in video games are ok" so I haven't really seen him address how deeply American philosophies fricked up global understanding of arcade design (since America is the capital of the world)
He plays Japanese versions, supports autofire, and mocked Twin Galaxies for their moronic scorekeeping rules
sure but I've not seen him go into the issue when defending arcade design which is sadly kind of a blind spot. someone can just go "well Simpsons Arcade & Turtles in Time did great in America and they were unfair so there goes your claim that arcade players weed out unfair games"
I dunno if he even explained why Turtles in Time arcade is shit and the SNES one is the fun one either. it's obvious if you're not an idiot but most people are willfully idiots when it comes to arcade games cuz they don't want to look weird & rock the boat too much
ok he did explain why arcade turtles in time is shit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ4MQsmn-2g&ab_channel=TheElectricUnderground
>Install MAME.
>Play a handful of games 3-4 times each
>uninstall
Honestly games are too bloated in general now. Even RPGs had better pacing in the 90s and wasted your time less without crafting systems and long voiced scenes.
that's one area where I don't really agree with arcade elitists; I think RPGs can be mechanically fun too. they just rarely treat that as a priority.
Same. I love a good RPG along with arcade games.
Hes comparing a racing car to a luxury vechicle. Many racing cars dont have air conditioners or radios because it weighs it down. Might be a fast way to get from point a to b, but only a few autist will take that on a road trip.
Shmups are good at having you play one way competively. Thats why its a dead genre.
It's actually a good comparison, if you want to have fun at a racetrack, you're going to want a racecar
race cars are used for races. souped up cars are used for, as you say, road trips. you're basically admitting that you think video games should be road trips and not games.
youre an idiot if thats what you got out of that.
Theres no talking to you, you have a one track mind for one type of game.
>you're a fricking autist if you like arcade games
>wtf you are unreasonable 🙁
im not going to spell it out for you if youre going to be a moron to bump your thread.
Last bump from me, 1cc with that homosexual.
>challenge and replayability
They were made to take your money
You sound like a zoomer that has never actually played in an arcade
do you think everyone who actually went to arcades now hates arcade games & thinks they're unfair bullshit or w/e? why would you keep doing if you think they're unfair.
>They were made to take your money
That's literally every game ever created for profit. How can this in itself be considered a flaw?
no you don't get it; games started as microtransactions and ended up again as microtransactions. capitalism stopped existing for a brief while and games were only made for the art of it (this period just so happens to coincide with the only years when the average Ganker poster was capable of experiencing happiness).
Arcades were forerunner of the microtransaction cancer.
again, explain how a system that encourages you to get better & better so you have to pay less & less is comparable to "pay to win"
>explain how a system that encourages you to get better & better so you have to pay less & less is comparable to "pay to win"
You just described World of Tanks.
Show nose.
I wouldn't know cuz I refuse to pay for any youtube promotion mainstay
>arcade rhythm games always the most fun and best value
>still doing just fine
seems like it's just shit arcade games that died
Video Games didn't change inside a vacuum, some big idea guys at corpo found out they can basically sell replayable movie/games to people who don't play games (but still want the quirky association of being a geek like Le Bazinga Theory)
just ask someone if they prefer graphics/mediocre gameplay or gameplay/mediocre graphics to discovery the tourists
I do think a game looking appealing is important but I also think the thing that defines a work as being part of its medium matters above all else. so yeah the game part matters more
>How do we go back to focusing on gameplay and less on cinematics, skinner-box grinding, handholdy combat, and fetch quests?
>we
>as if it is up to the consumer to create new material
The only thing WE can do is keep not purchasing bullshit video games with our money. Let the devs know. By letting them bankrupt themselves.
>arcade games are shit
>we're just coincidentally all jumping through hoops to squeeze mastery out of games not designed for it through speedrunning. we don't miss arcade design or anything, nope
>we're just coincidentally all jumping through hoops to squeeze mastery out of games not designed for it through speedrunning
the number of people who do this is infinitesimally small, maybe that's why arcade games died.
>we're all speedtrannies
Most of this board doesnt even play on hardmode
pretty sure there's more speedrunners on Ganker than people who try to master arcade games
Theoretically speaking, how hard would it be to code a beat'em up game in assembly, inject everything in a PIC and make a really simple arcade?
how do all the criticisms of arcade game difficulty ITT not apply just as well to easier, "hard by mainstream standards" games most of Ganker ardently defends like From Software stuff or God Hand? how are you not acting exactly the same as the IGN God Hand review guy, or people trying to pester From into adding easy modes to their games "for disabled people, honest" but over even harder games?
is it just the "insert a quarter for every try" part? does that mean the games you're shitting on suddenly become great in your minds when they get a good home port? I highly doubt it
people will never enjoy replaying the same beginning levels 100s of times, that's what it comes down to.
that's weird how you used an argument I barely ever see in these threads as soon as I completely shattered 99% of the criticisms actually used. sounds like it boils down to personal taste more than "objectively unfair design" don't it?
or lack of depth for that matter. honestly you make way more complicated decisions faster compared to From game even in something like Final Fight, and shmups are on a whole other level.
yeah that's nice but to access any of that you have to be willing to endure nauseating repetition.
>personal taste
universal taste.
>heh your argument wasn't used before so... I'm right?
Intelligence 1 speech 10 kind of post.
That anon is right, the difference between old hard games and new hard games is new hard games don't force you to replay old levels. If you're stuck in bloodborne you have plenty of options where to proceed from there, if you're stuck in ghosts and goblins well back to level one you go and play that shit again even though you've already beaten it about a hundred times. What's the fun in that
what people want from a difficult game is something like castlevania, a stiff challenge that they none the less can attain a satisfying conclusion to in a reasonable time frame with a reasonable amount of grind. Now think of the number of people who have ever even made it to the meat of an arcade game without credit feeding. imagine every single game you start you know will be essentially improbable for you to complete, an industry where nes contra would be considered a soft beginner game. devs like nintendo realized that's not what the average person is ever going to desire from an entertainment product.
so essentially you're the IGN God Hand reviewer with a slightly higher tolerance for difficulty and immediately pivot to "uhhh this is too hard, you're a loser if you like it" when met with harder games. gotcha.
>something like castlevania
Most modern gamers would say that (classic) castlevania sucks ass because it doesn't control like Ori.
castlevania's specific control is besides the point. people like focusing on immediate novel challenges.
It's funny when zoomers realize that arcade games aren't just button mashing quarter munching archaic junk but are actually much more difficult, better designed, and more in-depth than their DMCs, their Bloodbornes, their Bayonettas, their Celestes, their Hollow Knights, etc.
>muh repetition
train with savestates if it bothers you that much. it'll anger purists but whatever
>Never been particularly good at shmups, but a lot better at them than the average person so they see my struggling as something insanely impressive
>Still have tons of fun playing these games and trying to eke out small improvements here and there
>Routinely come back to them when feeling burnt out or stressed and just wanting to relax
I don't get people's animosity with them to be honest. I love them dearly and find them meditative even if I can't really play at the same level as the best.
you guys realize 'arcade design principles' doesn't have to mean 'literally every game is an arcade game with the exact same length, continue system, everything" right. 6th generation japanese games were good because they were inspired by arcade design.
original resident evil 4 was arcade inspired, re4 remake got rid of a lot of those elements
Building upon this, one of the major reasons why the post-SNES Rockman X games are so much weaker than the first three is because of the slow shift from arcade design to a more console centric one. Still love me some X6 though.
>How
Stop buying goyslop. THATS HOW