next »

[UnrealClock]

Ever since Bizarre's ridiculously un-nostalgic faux-retro arena shooter, "Geometry Wars" people got it in their heads that they thought the world deserved more games that have no level design and the exact same enemies over and over. Normally I hate disrespecting an entire genre, but when no creativity seems to be applied to it all why isn't it dead? I played SYNSO and War Twat with an eager look on my face moving my eyes around for something new. However I'm met with an art showcase, and I'll applaud it for that the design was indeed excellent but it fails to utilize its graphical advantage with the addition of any gameplay innovation. How could you make an Arena Shooter innovative? Geometry Wars 2 did a great job at showing off potential for innovation. The various gameplay modes took something stale and re-applied fresh paint, but it didn't entirely just come in one colour. The idea of an arcade style game is that you have something simple and challenging to play for a short burst or to be beaten (hiscores are generally not what I call fun). Its all removed when I can't run out quarters, and I simply just start over each and every time. Now that's where the fresh paint comes in. People are very ADD in games like these and that's why multiple game modes make something last significantly longer. Now not everyone is obviously about juggling game types, but this can lend so many new options for the sadistic little gents who enjoy playing one round of these for 5 hours. With multiple game modes you're left with all sorts of options to find your favorite to perfect. Now we also have those people who argue that innovation doesn't make a game. I'll agree with this but making the same thing over and over is a waste of time and resources. I'm probably just being silly here, but whatever. I'm sorry if you've spent thousand of hours developing one of these little things, but I suppose you could always take a few words into thought.



also this is probably written like a 5 year old with a crayon

[Tanner]

Geometry Wars Galaxies for the DS and Wii integrated level design into the formula, although it didn't do much.

[UnrealClock]

Geometry Wars Galaxies for the DS and Wii integrated level design into the formula, although it didn't do much.

There are quite a few level based arena shooters but they're sort of an entirely different genre. I would through SmashTV in this category.

[Business Bear]

Honestly, I kind of agree with this rant.     

[moshboy]

...games that have no level design and the exact same enemies over and over.

Arena shooters aren't meant to have level design - it's an arena - and most decent arena shooters do have enemy progression as you beat each new wave.

...why isn't it dead?

It's not dead simply because there are people that enjoy playing them. I'm not the biggest fan of the sub-genre myself but I enjoy some arena shooters.

I played SYNSO and War Twat with an eager look on my face moving my eyes around for something new. However I'm met with an art showcase, and I'll applaud it for that the design was indeed excellent but it fails to utilize its graphical advantage with the addition of any gameplay innovation. How could you make an Arena Shooter innovative? Geometry Wars 2 did a great job at showing off potential for innovation. The various gameplay modes took something stale and re-applied fresh paint, but it didn't entirely just come in one colour.

You're comparing games that are made for nothing to games that are developed by people who are paid a weekly wage. Don't you think that's a little unfair? I'm sure if I was paid a weekly wage, I'd be a lot more inclined to add a whole bunch of extra modes of play because I want people to buy my game.

On the other hand, Oddbob might tell them to fuck off. But that's Oddbob.

And I don't really think extra gameplay modes really = innvoation (I haven't played GW2 though). Maybe longevity of playtime.

I'm sorry if you've spent thousand of hours developing one of these little things, but I suppose you could always take a few words into thought.

If you're just referring to freeware, than the developer spends however much time he or she wishes, developing it. That's the whole point.. no pressure.

[Gnarf]

Yeah, if he released one game instead, with one game mode that was War Twat and one game mode that was SYNSO, that'd be like, better. Ugh.

Like, who wants to drive karts all the time? Minigame collections are just better.

Arena shooters aren't meant to have level design - it's an arena - and most decent arena shooters do have enemy progression as you beat each new wave.

That there can't be level design to arenas is kind of news to me, really. Someone should tell Quake III Arena : |

[moshboy]

That there can't be level design to arenas is kind of news to me, really. Someone should tell Quake III Arena : |

Well I'm not talking about First Person Arena shooters and this thread has nothing to do with them.. so.. yeah.

[William Broom]

That there can't be level design to arenas is kind of news to me, really. Someone should tell Quake III Arena : |

Well I'm not talking about First Person Arena shooters and this thread has nothing to do with them.. so.. yeah.

I think what he's saying is that 'arena' shooters don't necessarily have to have no level layout at all. They could have, say, a level that's one screen in size, symmetrical and fairly open, which would still facilitate the same kind of gameplay but with an added twist. I'm sure there are games like this but the only one I can think of off the top of my head is the hacking minigame from Sly 3 

[Gnarf]

What I meant was that I don't see why something being an arena should mean that there's no level design to it. The "it's an arena" part of what I quoted made it seem like that was why there should be no level design (and then it'd apply to any other arena, like an arena in an FPS or an arena in American Gladiators).

Actually, I'd expect a certain kind of level design given that it was an arena. Not no level design.

[godsavant]

Please tell me this is the first of a series of "Hang 'Em" rants, I quite agree with your opinions. 

[moshboy]

That there can't be level design to arenas is kind of news to me, really. Someone should tell Quake III Arena : |

Well I'm not talking about First Person Arena shooters and this thread has nothing to do with them.. so.. yeah.

I think what he's saying is that 'arena' shooters don't necessarily have to have no level layout at all. They could have, say, a level that's one screen in size, symmetrical and fairly open, which would still facilitate the same kind of gameplay but with an added twist. I'm sure there are games like this but the only one I can think of off the top of my head is the hacking minigame from Sly 3 

Point taken. I was thinking more along the lines of if they have any level design at all, it's more in the enemy behaviour/AI. I rarely think about the shape or size of the arena while I'm playing - just think about avoiding and shooting enemies.

[Dragonmaw]

I feel I have to respond to this because I'm developing an arena shooter

You're applying a blanket statement to a genre as a whole, which seems, frankly, stupid. Games like Everyday Shooter, Super Stardust HD, and even as far back as Smash TV show us that arena shooters can be clever, innovative, and interesting.

Everyday Shooter applies an interesting visual aesthetic, a catchy and gameplay-integrated soundtrack, and different scoring mechanisms for each level. It's an incredibly good play and possibly one of the best arena shooters of all time.

Super Stardust HD is incredibly pretty, has an awesome mix of mechanics, and a cool gimmick (going around a globe) that changes what could be just another boring shooter into something trippy and addicting. The core gameplay concepts are nothing amazing, but it's the presentation that truly shines.

Finally, Smash TV is an arena shooter where you actually move through the game world into different arenas. It gives you incentive to move on while being a competent and fun arena shooter.

Frankly, complaining about arena shooters because they are in an arena is like complaining about first-person shooters because they are first-person. It's just plain asinine.

[Oddbob]

On the other hand, Oddbob might tell them to fuck off. But that's Oddbob.

Dude, you know me too well!

Normally I hate disrespecting an entire genre, but when no creativity seems to be applied to it all why isn't it dead? I played SYNSO and War Twat with an eager look on my face moving my eyes around for something new. However I'm met with an art showcase, and I'll applaud it for that the design was indeed excellent but it fails to utilize its graphical advantage with the addition of any gameplay innovation.

That's kinda the point, man. Honestly, I don't give two shits for "innovating" - I just want to have some fun and make games that make me laugh. Y'know, I called one "War Twat" and the other "Squid Yes! Not So Octopus!" I figured I might have signposted it enough by that alone.

Innovation is something other people do as far as I'm concerned. I'm more interested in toying around with gaming tropes, fiddling with tried and tested mechanics and for want of a better phrase - just fucking around with them. They're just games I wanted made because no other bugger ever did. Don't mind me, I'm stuck in 1984 and loving it but if you're looking for innovation? You're looking to the wrong guy. I love dumb games too much.

Shit, I stole wholesale from Robotron, Wild West Hero, Geometry Wars and Minter. I'm not ashamed to say it either. At least I didn't steal the shit bits

The idea of an arcade style game is that you have something simple and challenging to play for a short burst or to be beaten (hiscores are generally not what I call fun).

10:1 difference of opinion there, then. Arcade games - or at least the ones I truly adore with my heartses - are purely about high scores to me. It's the fundamental hook that keeps me coming back for more. It's the reason I'll spend weeks of my life playing arcade games for "leagues" with other high scoring folks (not to Twin Galaxies sort of levels, more jumpers for goalposts...). It's the reason I hammered Space Giraffe till my hands were a claw - forever chasing the next high score hit. Where's the fun in Defender or Robotron without high score chasing? It's an integral part of their design. It's what they're for (or in SmashTV's case, that's pure eating your moneys as design stuffage)

I'm sorry if you've spent thousand of hours developing one of these little things, but I suppose you could always take a few words into thought.

The only thing I've spent thousands of hours on is masturbating. Don't regret a thing either.

[Dragonmaw]

The only thing I've spent thousands of hours on is masturbating. Don't regret a thing either.

Going in my sig now.

[princec]

Fuck level design. Random FTW. It's all about being in the Zone.

Cas

[Eclipse]

Arena shooters aren't meant to have level design - it's an arena - and most decent arena shooters do have enemy progression as you beat each new wave.

That there can't be level design to arenas is kind of news to me, really. Someone should tell Quake III Arena : |

what the hell? q3a is a 3d FPS not a 2d arena shmup dude

[Zaratustra]

arena shooters are a whole new genre of combat against a computer where you're trying to kill enemies and the computer is trying to give you seizures

[Dragonmaw]

arena shooters are a whole new genre of combat against a computer where you're trying to kill enemies and the computer is trying to give you seizures

Why is this thread full of so many quotables, damn.