Which of these competitive retro genres takes the more skills?
In what way are shmups competitive? Because they have scores? Then any other game with score is also competitive.
I nominate stuff from the golden age of arcades like Pac-man or DK to be the most competitive.
Fighting seems to have proved itself pretty well.
But I really like twinkle star sprites.
>>3352105
Non-danmaku shmups take the most skill.
Fighting game because you have the human element. Most STG's can be cleared with one credit with a few hours of practice.
>>3352154
>human element
1v1 me in twinkle star, scrub
>>3352105
There's a lot of subjectivity to this, but fighting games in general are repetitive and relatively easier to learn. Shmups require the most of your reflexes, attention and forward thinking.
>>3352134
R-type>Gradius
>>3352158
There's like 2 arcade vs shumps and a few Doujin games.
>>3352105
Puzzle games.
>>3352134
>the danmakus are easy meme
>>3352154
And you can 1cc fighting games in even less than that. Both genres are pretty good for different reasons, the CPU in shmups is waaaay better and deeper than most fighting games, making them a deeper solo experience, while fighting games are a deeperr Vs. experience.
>>3352601
Most shmup AI is actually pretty shit, you can divide them up into either aimed patterns or static patterns.
Also beating Krauser is harder than anything from a shmup.
>>3352614
>beating Krauser is harder than beating the second level in Gradius III with no power-ups and no slowdown
>>3352614
The quality of the AI doesn't matter as much as the combination of them and the system of the game as a whole, in fighting games you only have one CPU enemy that is often cheeseaable with boring repetitive moves (Krauser is no exception) shmups tend to have a lot more variety in ways to deal with certain situations. Also you are in the wrong if you think shmups are only about 1cc's.
The true STGs strategy games are the most patrician genre and are a true thinking mans genre
>>3352154
more like few dozen
no, I don't suck, it's you that has never 1cc'd a proper shmup
you're not wrong about the human element though
These are genres for the worst kind of human garbage
>>3352113
This is correct
>>3352745
infinite loops is for retards though
>>3352105
This idiot calls them STG and FTG. What a FGT.
>>3352794
A Kakuge
>>3352428
>doesn't know most shumps are just memorizing when to give the system input.
No wonder you think wrong
>>3352758
>he never reached a kill screen
get off my board, casual scum
>>3353773
fighting games are just memorizing your opponent's movements
>>3353776
>fighting games are just memorizing your opponent's movements
That's why playing fighting games against a computer is shit. When played properly you can't memorize your opponent's movements because your opponent is another thinking human reacting to you.
This is a pretty laughable question really.
>>3353774
I'm not simpleton enough to endure the same shit for 10 hours, sorry.
>>3353789
>When played properly you can't memorize your opponent's movements because your opponent is another thinking human reacting to you.
ssf2tsagatvssagat.mp4
>>3353773
>the memorization meme
Memorization means nothing if your execution is shit, try memorizing the route of a WR holder if you think it's that easy, you will take years to even have a score near as good. Besides most of the time you have to make your own strategies according to your skill level.
>>3353789
Again, the whole CPU system in a shmup is much more complex than playing fighting games solo, bragging about an "human factor" is retarded because shmups are still quite complex at what they do.
>>3353806
Excuses from a loser, why am I not surprised?
>>3353814
There's nothing bragging and of course both are complex. But bringing human thinking into a competition changes it completely.
We've had this exact conversation before. I'm not really interested in rehashing it all, but saying they're equivalent is pretty funny anyways.
>>3353829
That's why computers will never beat humans at games like chess or go.
>>3353828
>posting a hack that plays shitty uncompetitive games
why am i not surprised?
>>3353830
It's why computers will never be satisfying or interesting to play games like Chess or Go.
>>3353829
Of course it's different that was my point too, but it's not any more complex because of that.
>>3353843
>but it's not any more complex because of that.
lol
>>3353846
It's true though, and if you care too much about complexity in humans vs humans strategy games shit all over fighting games 2bh.
>>3353838
Loser
>>3353852
Strategy games are also pretty great.
>>3353789
certain shmups have bullets firing at you based on your position or various movements you make
what do you make of that?
>>3353886
What I make of that is by you bringing it up you illustrate how little you actually understand what I'm talking about. Which shouldn't be surprising at this point.
>>3353894
your argument was about shmups being devoid of human factors when the ai in a shmup is more than often dependent on responding to the player's actions
>>3352105
>SHMUPs
>Competitive
No single player game can be competitive.
And no, Score E-peen measuring doesn't mean shit, no sane human being thinks that arcade scores in FGs are a measure for anything.
Nobody fucking cares about your mad skillz in Battle Garegga or KoF 97, every genre takes a different set of skills, stop wanking over scores.
>>3353906
Just leave it there, the guy clearly doesn't have much experience with the genre if he thinks beating Krauser is comparable to high level in shmups.
>>3353906
I just explained to you that fighters are shit against a computer because it's not fun playing a strategy game against something that can't think. A shmup responding to where your ship is, is exactly the same as AI responding to you in a fighting game.
>>3353920
>no sane human being thinks that arcade scores in FGs are a measure for anything.
That's because scoring in shmups is actually interesting.
>every genre takes a different set of skills
I agree, but to say that scoring isn't important in shmups is kinda dumb, games from mid 90s and onwards focus a lot on scoring mechanics.
>>3352105
Your question is pretty stupid, these genres have way too different skills necessary to be even comparable so you could decide which one is "the hardest one".
An actual valid question would be "Which one of these genres are more easy to start playing at a high (or competitive) level?"
TGM is the most competitive.
Dumb thread, as usual.
arena fps (q3) > fg's > shmups
>>3352105
I like how the 3D picks look the most boring on both sides.
>>3354219
We's with the homies in the downtowns do's.
>>3354205
Einhander is only really hyped up by ignorant Squarebabbies desu.
The main reason comparisons of skill don't work here is that shmups are solo and fighters are multiplayer.
In a 1-player game, you're competing against the fixed (in same cases algorithmic) difficulty of the game, and skill is defined by completing the game with the best possible score. This puts it in the exact spiritual realm as the Golden Age classics, because while yeah, lots of people can beat the game, good luck attaining that top score. That's where the active competition lies, even though its played out individually. Same category as speedruns.
The difficulty of fighting games on the other hand derives from multiplayer. No one (that I know) actually buys a fighting game for 1 player (with exceptions, of course, but all top tier fighting games are about VS mode). They could program the AI impossibly hard or, if they really wanted to, give it deep learning. It's almost certainly possible to create an AI that can beat the best human players without tricks or hyper-reaction times. But this is against the entire spirit of fighting games in the way that playing tennis against a machine would be.
Also, the maximum difficulty you can derive from the game is based on 1) time 2) luck 3) your own skill. At the game's height of popularity(1), you'll have the greatest number of skilled players to play against, and a few of them will be the Best. If you can enter those ranks(3), you'll have a limited chance(2) to play the most difficult opponents, but it'll be tempered by the skill it took you to get there. So fighters are more living and breathing challenges. Difficulty depends on the current popularity of the game.
The last hurdle to a direct comparison is that skill in fighters is measured by VS records, while shmups by top-score. Many great games vs. one very good game.
That said... it take more skill to beat practically any shmup than it does to beat almost any fighter in single player, or against scrubs (assuming you have some skill.)
>>3353920
>No single player game can be competitive
i guess speedruns and scoreruns don't exist, or the thousands of people competing for them, since competition now only means "direct competition."
>Nobody fucking cares about your mad skillz in Battle Garegga or KoF 97, every genre takes a different set of skills, stop wanking over scores.
what is with your hatred with scores? it's a way of measuring skill in a 1 player game. this is just as dumb as saying no one cares about your SF record (which is a type of score). unless you're playing for glory, you're playing for some kind of numerical recognition of skill. are you a leet clanner or something? no one ever played Mario with you? what happened 3355920?
>>3352113
Super Mario Bros is the most competitive of games
>>3352113
>implying grandpa games are competitive
The most competitive video game of all time is Starcraft 2.
>>3352105
>game that is exactly the same every single time you play it vs. game that changes every single time you play it
>"which one takes more skill"
hm
>>3355285
but this is dumb. even if every shmup was the exact same play-thru -- which they definitely aren't, not even considering the compounding effects of player's own inputs -- they are harder on average to beat, ie: win at, than any arcade mode in a fighter, despite infinite outcomes. so the only challenge comes from other people. you're forced to play with people of your skill level if you don't want to crush or be crushed, resulting in a mixed record of wins and losses. how is having an average fighting record more skillfull than being able to complete a full game by competitive standards? unless everyone is just a complete pro in which case there's still a hierarchy? at any rate, almost any game can be brought to absurd heights of skill, make no sense to pretend shmups of all things don't have a high ceiling. i would love to shit on your high-scores all day, and listen to you tell me how unskillful it is.
>>3352105
>>3355045
I would say it goes like this.
Solo: shmups > beat 'em ups > fighting games
Co-op: beat 'em ups > shmups
Vs: Fighting = Puzzle? honestly i don't have much experience with puzzle games but Puyo and Puzzzle bobble can get pretty crazy.
>>3355038
>spectators described the computer's play in poetic terms, for what it's worth
To each their own. I find it soulless and boring, but I feel that way playing any sort of vs game against an AI.
>>3355497
>Two types of delicious tree fruit
>One legendarily referred to as a golden version of the other
>not comparable
lol
>>3355276
>grandpa games
Damn, such wild behavior on a board called Retro Games
>Blizzard shit
Hahaha, get out of here.
