In the early days of arcade gaming, the main goal was to get the highest score possible. Now the main goal is to beat levels and see how far you can get in a game. A game that I instantly think of when playing for score is Geometry Wars on Xbox 360. I have never been so obsessed with racking up points in any other game. I think the thrill of the game was increasing your point multiplier and trying to do the best you could in 10mins of gameplay.
What factors in score-based games do you like? Is it the multipliers? The short time limit or limited time opportunities? The techniques and tricks to getting points? Name some games where you actually care about score.
Great topic.
I didn't get into this type of game until a couple of years ago. What I like about high-score games is they are usually quick plays - I usually play something like Galaga or Star Force before settling into a longer game.
I also really enjoy scoring games that have secret bonuses. Like destroying Larios in Star Force before combines, for example, or touching certain walls in Gradius to get extra points/lives.
I have a binder where I keep all my notes and maps from NES/FC games, and one page in there is dedicated to high scores. None of them are very impressive, but it's always nice to erase one and write in a bigger number :)
Back when I was in high school, we didn't have smartphones, but we did have graphing calculators. During trigonometry class, my buddies and I would try to get the highest score in the TI83 version of Galaga.
Galaga, Pac Man, Dig Dug, Recca 8)
are but a few
I've noticed that I only care about score when I'm playing with others. There has to be a social aspect involved, unless you unlock something for getting a score. For example, getting a good score in Starfox 64 gets you medals. Another game I liked playing for score was Mario Kart Wii. I was all about getting better time trials than my brother and seeing how I rank up online.
Me and my siblings hardly cared for the score in games like Super Mario Bros when it's more about exploring the many levels and no way to save hi-scores. Game's with a hi-score lists that saved however we often competed for score in.
One interesting aspect of scoring in games is how high amount of points you often get. In non-electronic games and sports (mahjong being a notable exception) you often get low-numbered scores that's easy to count, but in pinball and video games where the score is calculated by a computer, thousands and even millions of points isn't uncommon.
I've been working on a Famicom game in my free time and I've been pondering on what kind of scoring system I'd use. I seldom thought too much about how a scoring system, with all the bonus points and stuff, works under the hood so I'm not sure what's best. I'm not even sure a scoring system would fit in my game. What do you all think a basic scoring system should look like to make the game more fun?
Quote from: P on July 31, 2015, 02:40:14 pm
Me and my siblings hardly cared for the score in games like Super Mario Bros when it's more about exploring the many levels and no way to save hi-scores. Game's with a hi-score lists that saved however we often competed for score in.
One interesting aspect of scoring in games is how high amount of points you often get. In non-electronic games and sports (mahjong being a notable exception) you often get low-numbered scores that's easy to count, but in pinball and video games where the score is calculated by a computer, thousands and even millions of points isn't uncommon.
I've been working on a Famicom game in my free time and I've been pondering on what kind of scoring system I'd use. I seldom thought too much about how a scoring system, with all the bonus points and stuff, works under the hood so I'm not sure what's best. I'm not even sure a scoring system would fit in my game. What do you all think a basic scoring system should look like to make the game more fun?
I've been thinking about this a lot lately and the lower the points awarded, the higher the value. Like in Starfox 64, getting 200 points in Corneria gets you a medal. You get 1 point each thing destroyed, and a few more points when using a charged shot when destroying multiple enemies next to each other. With the low point values for each destroyed enemy, you can actually count how many points you will get while playing the level. I always liked when your score would give you 1ups when getting a certain amount.
I also like when there is a score for each individual level, instead of the whole game. It makes you want to perform better when re-playing levels and helps you see which levels you're good at and which ones you need to improve.
Yeah Star Fox 64 has very simple scoring. You also get bonus points for certain tougher enemies and bosses.
Quote from: zmaster18 on July 31, 2015, 03:11:26 pm
I always liked when your score would give you 1ups when getting a certain amount.
I agree, in games like Rush n Attack where lives are precious I always aim for increasing my score as much as possible. Trying to hit as many mines as possible with the bazooka for example, and going for the enemies that gives more points.
Adding some kind of reward for scoring is a good idea.
I don't anymore, but back in my teens I was pretty obsessed with getting as good as I could get at dance dance revolution and in the groove 2. You would also build up a large audience at the arcades when you were doing awesome as well, and that gave me a pretty big sense of thrill I was top 5 best in Manitoba Canada for a while.
A really good use of score is in Super Mario Bros. I like how when you use a koopa shell to hit a bunch of enemies in a row, you get 100 points, then 200, then 400, etc..., then a 1up.
That's a good example of simple chain bonus points, you get more points for defeating multiple enemies in one shot. The 1-UP isn't directly related to score though, you get it in addition to the score bonus. Just like when gathering 100 coins.
Another thing that have always bothered me: Some games like Super Mario Bros and SMB2j displays the count of your total remaining lives (when the counter reaches 0 it's Game Over), but many other games (including about all later Mario games I think) only displays your extra lives besides the one you are "using" (when the counter reaches 0 you still have your last life left).
What do you all prefer?
I prefer the latter, that is, the lives counter representing how many *extra* lives I have in stock.
To answer the original post, I'm going to also say Galaga. Just always enjoyed playing that one at the local movie theater, and have had the high score there for a few years now. In a very different way, I like playing for points on Castlevania 1 - I like making the score max out and reset.
Quote from: P on August 02, 2015, 06:23:28 am
That's a good example of simple chain bonus points, you get more points for defeating multiple enemies in one shot. The 1-UP isn't directly related to score though, you get it in addition to the score bonus. Just like when gathering 100 coins.
Another thing that have always bothered me: Some games like Super Mario Bros and SMB2j displays the count of your total remaining lives (when the counter reaches 0 it's Game Over), but many other games (including about all later Mario games I think) only displays your extra lives besides the one you are "using" (when the counter reaches 0 you still have your last life left).
What do you all prefer?
I actually like SMB style, where 1 is the lowest amount you can have.
I think in terms of modern game design, a game should only have a score if:
- It is a game built around gaining a high score, or
- The player receives rewards for score milestones.
If neither of these are satisfied, you get something like the first Mega Man, where there's a score number at the top of the screen and there are items that increase the score, but the game doesn't show top scores or give you anything for increasing it. Same for Super Mario Bros. 3, IIRC. I blame these "vestigial" point tallies on the shifting focus in game design from score competition to goal reaching.
I think it would be interesting to see a SHMUP that gives the players extra weapons/upgrades the ship/etc. for reaching point milestones. Combining that with the mentality of the old Hudson carnival games (Star Force, etc.) of hunting for secret point bonuses, and you have a lot of good brain juices going. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if this has been done already - I'm not up on most modern SHMUPS that aren't Gradius or R-Type.
Quote from: Zycrow on August 04, 2015, 12:05:33 pmI think it would be interesting to see a SHMUP that gives the players extra weapons/upgrades the ship/etc. for reaching point milestones. Combining that with the mentality of the old Hudson carnival games (Star Force, etc.) of hunting for secret point bonuses, and you have a lot of good brain juices going. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if this has been done already - I'm not up on most modern SHMUPS that aren't Gradius or R-Type.
Radiant Silvergun does something a bit like this.
Post Merge: August 04, 2015, 01:20:54 pm
I'm more of a time attacker in racing games and I've done a lot on that front, but I have played some games for score as well. I played Recca's 2-minute mode a
lot when I first got the game, got over 500k there. I've played many Caravan games for score, the later Star Soldiers, Hector '87, etc. There's a game called Kyotokei on Wiiware that's basically a simplified, hori-version of Ikaruga, I played that for score. Blazing Star, Brave Blade, G-Darius, dabbled in scoreplay all those.
Shmups tend to be good candidates for scoreplay. Platformers and games like Castlevania, Mega Man, etc. rarely so, because the score system isn't fully thought out in those, but it was included because all games just tended to have a score counter back in those days. Even if it doesn't really fit the game or the score system can be exploited easily.
Quote from: P on July 31, 2015, 02:40:14 pm
I've been working on a Famicom game in my free time and I've been pondering on what kind of scoring system I'd use. I seldom thought too much about how a scoring system, with all the bonus points and stuff, works under the hood so I'm not sure what's best. I'm not even sure a scoring system would fit in my game. What do you all think a basic scoring system should look like to make the game more fun?
I'd have to know more about the game in question before giving suggestions. Is it a shmup? An action-platformer? A puzzler? Or something totally different?
Yeah I figured it's hard to give advice when you don't know what kind of game it is.
It's still very early in production and I'm only working on it in my free time, so development is slow (not to mention I'm not really a programmer and have never made a real Famicom game before). The project name I gave it is MAZE GAME so it's a top-down view game (easier physics than a platformer). Not much more than that has been decided although I had some ideas when I started and depending and how easy it proves to be, I might make it into either an action game (think Pacman/Bomberman) a puzzle game (think Eggerland) or a mix of the two. If it goes into the puzzle game direction, a scoring system might feel like out of place and be there just because most other games has scoring as someone here said. But who knows, I might get creative with it.
I have almost got moving to work correctly, and I have a decent sound engine (hard stuff to make, took a lot of time) that can play songs similar to sheet music (song data consist of note length, pitch, rests, repeats etc). I want it to be NTSC, PAL and Dendy compatible but I currently have trouble with the tempo.
Digdug is the only game I play for score.
I play tsone's 2048 for score. It's by far my favorite version of the game.
Mostly any Famicom game a score with no ending. I also play Super Mario Bros. 1-3 and Castlevania for score.
Donkey Kong. With a set number of lives and levels (the "kill-screen" in Donkey Kong's case), plus a timer that gives you less bonus the longer you take, you're forced to find a trade off between speed and point pressing to get a high a score as possible. Very addictive!
Quote from: P on August 04, 2015, 03:54:12 pm
Yeah I figured it's hard to give advice when you don't know what kind of game it is.
It's still very early in production and I'm only working on it in my free time, so development is slow (not to mention I'm not really a programmer and have never made a real Famicom game before). The project name I gave it is MAZE GAME so it's a top-down view game (easier physics than a platformer). Not much more than that has been decided although I had some ideas when I started and depending and how easy it proves to be, I might make it into either an action game (think Pacman/Bomberman) a puzzle game (think Eggerland) or a mix of the two. If it goes into the puzzle game direction, a scoring system might feel like out of place and be there just because most other games has scoring as someone here said. But who knows, I might get creative with it.
I have almost got moving to work correctly, and I have a decent sound engine (hard stuff to make, took a lot of time) that can play songs similar to sheet music (song data consist of note length, pitch, rests, repeats etc). I want it to be NTSC, PAL and Dendy compatible but I currently have trouble with the tempo.
KHan Games over at NA just released a "top-down maze game," a box-pusher, Eggerland style, and its point sytem is a "lowest # of moves" system, and works very well. Demo download in link (http://nintendoage.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=22&threadid=151638).
Sounds like something I had in mind. I can't find the link though. Do you need to be a member on NA to see it or am I just not looking hard enough?
Quote from: P on August 30, 2015, 11:16:43 am
Sounds like something I had in mind. I can't find the link though. Do you need to be a member on NA to see it or am I just not looking hard enough?
I'm a member at NA, and I can't see the link either. The demo is available on his Facebook page though (and you don't need to be a member):
https://www.facebook.com/khangames1
It took me a while to find the link as well, it's there as an attachment to the first post. Search for the text "demo.nes" on your browser and you'll find it.
I'm not sure why people are comparing this to Lolo, though. It's a Sokoban clone, plain and simple. I happen to love Sokoban so this is a good thing for me, I'm bummed out that the Famicom's only Sokoban titles were for the FDS.
Quote from: Ghegs on August 30, 2015, 12:12:13 pm
I'm bummed out that the Famicom's only Sokoban titles were for the FDS.
Ochin ni Toshi Puzzle Tonjan!? has Sokoban elements and is on a cart.
I'm sure there where some more classic Sokoban game for cartridge as well?
Quote from: Ghegs on August 30, 2015, 12:12:13 pm
It took me a while to find the link as well, it's there as an attachment to the first post. Search for the text "demo.nes" on your browser and you'll find it.
I'm not sure why people are comparing this to Lolo, though. It's a Sokoban clone, plain and simple. I happen to love Sokoban so this is a good thing for me, I'm bummed out that the Famicom's only Sokoban titles were for the FDS.
Still can't find it. I guess you need to be a member to see attachment links. I got it through the Facebook link though.
So it's just Sokoban with pixel-based movement. My puzzle game idea would have Sokoban-style box pushing as part of solving the puzzles (much like Eggerland) and tile-based movement. But it would be an unique game that includes using spells like fire, ice, wind and so on.
Quote from: UglyJoe on August 30, 2015, 02:58:45 pm
Quote from: Ghegs on August 30, 2015, 12:12:13 pm
I'm bummed out that the Famicom's only Sokoban titles were for the FDS.
Ochin ni Toshi Puzzle Tonjan!? has Sokoban elements and is on a cart.
That's true, thanks for the reminder. Still, not a pure Sokoban like the FDS-only title Namida No Sokoban Special. And yeah, that's the only (officially released) classic Sokoban game available on the NES/Famicom/FDS.
The pixel-based movement in The Incident was the cause of most of my level restarts. Sokoban traditionally has tile-based movement and it threw me off quite a few times. There doesn't seem to be a good reason for it to be that way either, other than to be a Special Snowflake anyway. In Lolo the pixel-based movement is a proper design choice, since you sometimes want to push a block only halfway in.
(EDIT: I derped, Lolo's movement isn't exactly pixel-based, it's more like half-tile-based or something.)
Also P, your game interests me and I wish to hear more as it develops.
Sure! :D Just don't expect too much updates soon though. I'll be busy with work for some time.
Yeah pixel-based movement in a game like that is annoying me too. Tile-based is a little harder to do than pixel-based movement, but since he used tile-based movement for the boxes, he could've used the same movement code for the main character. So it's not because he was lazy.
I've managed to do pixel-based movement by looking at how Final Fantasy did it. But besides sound, I haven't done much more than that. Going to figure out a way to store levels without them taking too much ROM space next.