From: kdmiller@athena.mit.edu (Kenneth D Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.games.video,rec.games.video.arcade
Subject: Re: Genesis Shooters
Date: 10 Oct 92 20:29:48 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <ldbsbfINNjp0@news.bbn.com> oliveira@bbn.com (John Oliveira) writes:
>In article <1992Oct9.114805.2413@rtsg.mot.com>, king@rtsg.mot.com (Steven King, Software Archaeologist) writes:
>
>> NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!  >extreme agony<  >pained look<
>> This is exactly my complaint with the current rash of video games,
>> especially shoot-em-ups.  Now, I freely admit that I like a good
>> shoot-em-up, and there have been a few entries into that market in the
>> past few years.  There's been *nothing* that I've liked very much.
>> The reason is, they've all got too much crap flying around the screen
>> that's completely irrelevant to gameplay.  
>
>What!! To much crap on the screen is irrelevant? Since when?
>This is what makes the game challenge, the more enemies on the screen brings
>out the game . It makes it harder and more of a challenge.
>What do you prefer, one ship that you control with 2 or 3 enemies to shoot at?

I think what he means is when the "crust" of graphics on a game makes it
impossible to see what is happening.  Just play Strikeforce and you'll 
understand.  I have played it and the background is the same detail and 
intensity level as all of the foreground graphics.  The foreground objects 
blend in with the background and suddenly, BOOM you're dead.

Worse, Strikeforce and several other Williams/Midway games like it (i.e.,
Smash TV, Total Carnage, etc. etc. etc.) have huge (sometimes messy) 
explosions that obscure large sections of the screen.  You literally cannot 
see what is going on underneath the explosions, and something nasty might be 
hiding there, like enemy shots or land mines...

I have no problems with *better* graphics, it's just *irrelevant* graphics like
bright backgrounds, large opaque explosions, and other "eye candy" that detract
from the game that bother me.

The reason that so many modern games "need" so many enemies is that INVARIABLY
your ship will get "powered up" to a state where you can carve huge swaths of
death through incredible hordes of foes without any problem.

In "classic" arcade games, you had:  1. a narrow-beam gun which did ONE hit of
damage (which was all it took, usually), and 2. a full-screen blast (smartbomb)
maybe.  There were no powerups.  Survival depended upon the player making the
best use of these weapons, as you never got any more.

In Defender and Stargate, having three enemies on your tail firing furiously
was QUITE enough, thank you.  (In particular, three Mutants in Defender will
make your life miserable!  God help you if you have no smartbombs...One Mutant
is plenty...)


NOW...after all that ranting and raving about the way I happen to like my games
(I happen to like scrolly shooting games, BTW, but there all so...so...alike),
I'd like to ask a question:

Whatever happened to small, fast enemies that you could dispatch with one shot,
IF you could hit them (i.e. Defender's Mutants).  Everything now in a scrolly
shooter seems to be either 1. huge, nasty, armored gunships, or 2. "swarms" of
enemies.  Why?

Just imagine facing an enemy ship that actually DODGED your shots!  Heheheheh

Enough ranting for one day...sorry
-- 
For a good time, email  | Ken Miller, sole member of Digital Horizons USA,
kdmiller@athena.mit.edu | future perpetrator of random bogosity like KMUS,
  //|       Accept No   | DoomStar, Destructor-X, Dreadnought, Captain K.'s
\X/~|MIGA!  Substitutes | Big Adventure, and The Demo With No Name.