Jaguar HSC Revamped, Season 4, ROUND 2

[Austin]

Round is over.

[PFG 9000]

I realize I'm getting this in late, but I didn't have time to play games much over the past few weeks until now. I was really hoping to get into Trevor McFur. Unfortunately, I just find it infuriating due to the poor game design. I'm generally bad at sidescrolling shooters, but they've been a favorite genre of mine for many years. I can recognize a good one when I see it...and Trevor McFur is far from it. Here's the best I could do with my limited time.

 

139,940

Edited August 17, 2012 by PFG 9000

[sh3-rg]

Unfortunately, I just find it infuriating due to the poor game design. I'm generally bad at sidescrolling shooters, but they've been a favorite genre of mine for many years. I can recognize a good one when I see it...and Trevor McFur is far from it. Here's the best I could do with my limited time.

 

It's got a very rough feel right to the core from the often shoddy and mismatched graphics to the thoroughly uninspired gameplay. The way power ups work it's like they "designed" them, threw them in to test them but then never took (or were given) the time to implement them in a way that made any sense. Enemies/waves are totally uninspired and without any understanding of how a good shmup works. I couldn't find the courage to go back and play this again after giving it a few tries when the compo was announced, awful game.

[twoquickcapri]

139,940

 

I'll add your one participation point to the next round since I can't edit this one.

Edited August 18, 2012 by twoquickcapri

[+jeremiahjt]

 

Enemies/waves are totally uninspired and without any understanding of how a good shmup works.

 

Is there some accepted "understanding" when it comes to shmups that all people in the world agree on? I like the game and the enemies, but maybe I just need someone to explain the intricasies of shmups for me to understand why I shouldn't like it.

[Austin]

Enemies/waves are totally uninspired and without any understanding of how a good shmup works.

 

Is there some accepted "understanding" when it comes to shmups that all people in the world agree on? I like the game and the enemies, but maybe I just need someone to explain the intricasies of shmups for me to understand why I shouldn't like it.

 

Good visuals, a kicking soundtrack, and solid sound effects can go a long way when implemented properly (the only thing that comes close to being decent in this game is in the visuals department).

 

Next, you have the pacing. Does it ease you in, or does it throw you in neck deep? Does it fluctuate? Is there any kind of flow in the game? (the short answer for this particular title: no, there's not).

 

Then you have things like the implementation of weapons, items, pickups, etc. As sh3 mentioned, there seems to have been little thought in this department. Just a lot of random stuff thrown into a mixing pot, and then the development team said, "OK boys, let's call it a day!".

 

Lastly, you have what designers call "feel". It's basically the quality of whatever sensation you get when mowing down objects--the combination of the gameplay, sights and sounds in a quick one-two punch. Does it feel good? Does it feel bad? Sure, some of it is subjective, but much of it tried and true thanks to the arcade industry where they needed to craft games that would grab you instantly, and keep you coming back for more.

 

Basically, it's not so much understanding shmups as it is understanding good design for instant-gratification, action/arcade styled games. Something this game mostly lacks.

[+jeremiahjt]

I just typed out a long rebuttal and for some reason hitting the backspace button made my browser go back and I lost everything. So I'll summarize: me likey and you don't.

[Austin]

So I'll summarize: me likey and you don't.

 

There's simply "not liking a game", and then there's "noting the flaws of a game in relation to the quality of what else is available". Neither should be misconstrued for one-another.