Talk:Shoot 'em up/Archive 1

Danmaku

How come Danmaku isn't listed under subgenres or anywhere else on the article?

It is mentioned. Fairly extensively. Frogacuda 06:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New merge discussion

The old merge seemed a bit silly. They wanted to merge this article into scrolling shooter, which wouldn't have made seense. However, merging scrolling shooter into this one makes a lot of sense, since it is a sub-genre, and, in fact, the predominant form of shoot 'em ups. Most of the games discussed on this page are scrolling shooters. I think it could easily be intergrated.Frogacuda 21:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs some major rethinking and reorganizing. Let's go for GA!

A while back I noticed that none of the gaming genre articles had made it to GA status, which is a problem, because genres articles offer a unique opportunity to discuss a broad movement of gaming history without being too overwhelming. It took a complete rewrite, pretty much from scratch, but I got the Platform game article to GA, and now I'd love to see the shmup article get there as well.

So here's what I think we need to do:

Write a coherent history of the genre from inception to present. I've started on this, and will continue to work on it.
Trim the jargon out of the article. I started a lexicon of shooter vernacular section where we can acknowledge and define these terms, but using them in the main article is unneccessary and will make the article more difficult to follow for someone with no knowledge of the genre.
Narrow the article down a bit. I think we should trim out the stuff regarding rail shooters, since they're sometimes not recognized as shoot 'em ups, and they have their own entry already. Same for run and guns.
Merge scrolling shooter article with this one. It offers very little that isn't covered here, and its existence will only confuse people.
REFERENCES: We need them in a big way.
Cute 'em up doesn't need its own section. A paragraph or two discussing all the diverse themes of shooters would serve this purpose better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frogacuda (talk • contribs) 01:33, 29 January 2007

I gotta say I disagree on Cute 'em ups. Not only do a few articles link directly to that (now gone) section, but they are a rather significant sub-genre - Parodius, Fantasy Zone, etc. Xmoogle (talk) 14:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate Genre

The "shooting gallery" genre isn't one that I'd say is part of shoot em up. It's definitely part of shooting game, but not the traditional shoot em up. I would rather that be on the shooting game page, and I'm going to try and put it there. --GG Vic Viper 21:58, 17 May 2006 (EST)

Japanese shoot-em-ups

this article should be renamed japanese shoot-em-ups, because that is all it seems to mention, there is, for instance, no information on any of the popular european shoot-em-ups of the c64 and amiga —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.98.193 (talk) 08:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What else needs to be done?

This article has matured alot recently. What else do you think needs to be done? Are the current subgenres listed acceptable? Should an overall history be given? Or should the history be kept in teh sub-genres? --Larsinio 20:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Multi-scrolling shooter

Is konami the only designer of games that altenrate scrolling schemes between levels?! --Larsinio 20:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Progear is both vertically and horizontally scrolling, too. elias.hc 21:37, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So did Thunder Force II, plus others I can't remember right now.

Should scrolling shooter be completely merged into this article?

Should scrolling shooter be completely mergeD? The only difference thing ont included are the charactersitcs like powerups, bosses, and all that jazz. --Larsinio 15:38, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What else should be added as well? A history section? a Modern section? I dont know what to do from here --Larsinio 15:38, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely should be merged into this. Most of the stuff regarding powerups and what not isn't realyy needed, anyway.Frogacuda 01:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

merge Discussion

They shouldn't be merged. I've edited the Shoot 'em up page to be different from the Scrolling shooter page, because not all shmups are scrolling shooters (Space Invaders, Tempest). Shoot 'em up is a general arcade shooter, and a subgenre of the shooter game genre, because not all shooters are shmups. There are shoot 'em ups/arcade shooters, action-shooters, light gun shooters and FPSs. All are different types of game, and although some others may be released in arcades, arcade shooter and shoot 'em up are the same subgenre of shooter. Scrolling shooters are a part of shoot 'em ups, and both pages should exist. Ditto shoot 'em ups and general shooters.

Shooters and Shmups shouldn't be merged because they are very different genres. First person and third person shooters are usually free roaming and the camera perspective is that of the player, they have many elements other then just shooting. Shmups center around shooting and has a fixed camera. Shooters make up a huge percentage of comercial videogames and should have a page of it's own to describe it in more detail. Rail shooter is a sub genre of shmups, but is sometimes used to describe shmups.

However there is a proliferation of duplicate pages. Shoot_'em_up is basically a younger version of Scrolling_shooter. Pages like the SHMUP have wisely been made to redirect to existing pages and I think there is a serious case for merging and redirecting Shoot_'em_up to Scrolling_shooter.

~~I also saw a page that had an alternative spelling/capitalisation of shoot 'em up which is inviting people to create yet another duplicate page. I can't seem to find it again though.~~ It was the Computer_and_video_game_genres page which was linking to shoot 'em up*s*. I've fixed it up to point to the existing shoot 'em up page for now.

I vote for it to be merged into Scrolling shooter--Mitsukai 18:59, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I vote for NOT merging into Scrolling shooter--Funvill 12:43, 15 January 2006 (PST)
I vote for NOT merging into Scrolling shooter--GG Vic Viper 17:15, 16 January 2006 (EST)
I vote for NOT merging into Scrolling shooter - • | ĐÜ§§§Ť | • ^{T | C} 22:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hold off on the vote

I am going to hold off for now on voting as I started a discussion on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer and video games about this. PLus im totally confused by also there existing a Shooter game article. So we need to fiogure this all out. As of now id like it to be:

Shooter game

Light gun game
Rail shooter
Shoot 'em up
- This includes Scrolling shooter

please weigh in. Thanks --Larsinio 19:32, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshots

I was wondering why I saw no screenshots until the very end of the article. Couldn't we have one definitive screenshot for each genre alongside its blurb? And also maybe put a Space Invaders shot right at the top. The article looks extremely unbalanced right now. I'm personally against the screenshot summaries being seperate... one screenshot per genre should be enough and others could easily be seen by following article links. What do you think? - Phorque 08:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I started messing with teh screenshots. IM trying to have it so theres two screenshots on the same horizontal line, but have been unsucessful in my tweaking. Please try ! --Larsinio 15:32, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, maybe there should be a screenshot of Space Invaders in the lead rather than Radiant Silvergun. It does seem like the more definitive title, I just chose Silvergun because there was no screenshot for it and it's such a popular title. Or maybe it's fine as is, I don't know. Manmonk 21:19, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Shmups?

Perhaps a section mentioning shmups today and their decline in popularity in the west (as well as their...essentially maintained popularity in the east), and special cases like Ikaruga or Radilgy?

Any thoughts? What would it be called without being clunky and superfluous (or could it be put in another section)? "Modern Developments?" Donno.

Lockeownzj00 06:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed shooter

I've had this discussion before, but nothing ever seems to come of it. Is Fixed shooter an actual genre, or is it a term that's been invented for convenience? I've never seen it used anywhere except Wikipedia, and most Google hits for it point to here. Spottedowl 16:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, i dont think its invented. But it could be. I did some cursory research and found no references otehr than wikipedia. Gallery shooter is a common accepted term however --Larsinio 17:36, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SHMUPS - problem with name

Who actually uses the term "SHMUPS"? I know one guy who invented it to be unique, but nobody actually uses it. And it's annoying. I vote to replace all entries of SHMUP in the main article with "Shoot 'em up."

It seems to be recognised enough to be the title of a website dedicated to shoot 'em ups, www.shmups.com. However, I too hate the word. :) Spottedowl 18:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a British phrase, and very popular over here. VERY popular. I've added a short history of the word, and how it originated. Including a link to a place that has scans of the magazine that first feature it, Zzap 64. I can't be bothered to find the exact scans though, I leave that up to you guys. It is true though. I've noticed quite often on Wikipedia, that a lot of things are removed simply because Americans don't know of them, or don't understand them (what springs to mind is several famous UK developers who worked on the ZX Spectrum, where, during voting for these pages to be deleted, scores of Americans claimed "never heard of him. Delete." - Now, I'm not trying to be Xenophobic, but please, consider that maybe something was huge mainly in the UK and Europe, and that's why you haven't heard of it in America. It really saddens me when I see this happening. Not so much related to this shmup page, since clearly it's still here, but I felt like ranting about some of Wiki's seemingly random deletions of UK-centric pages. ;-)

That's strange. I'm British and have been reading computer magazines since the early 1990s, and I never heard the term until a few years ago. I thought it WAS American. Was it perhaps a console thing? Spottedowl 11:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm 100% certain it was coined by Zzap 64, a magazine dedicated to the C64, an 8-bit home micro. Here's a good link, showing it originated in 1985, just search for "shmup": http://www.zzap64.co.uk/zzaped85.html

They talk about the creation of new words. Also, scans:

http://www.zzap64.co.uk/cgi-bin/displaypage.pl?issue=003&page=019&thumbstart=0&magazine=zzap&check=1

Apologies about the long link, I hope it doesn't break this page.

Did it become popular, though? You say it's very popular in Britain, but I never heard of it in about six years of reading Amiga magazines (mostly Amiga Power) and ten years of playing computer games. To me it's always been shoot 'em up. Maybe it was just Zzap64 that used it? Spottedowl 14:11, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, shmup.com is a website that uses the name and is dedicated to the genre. Ironically actually, although it started in a UK home computer mag, it became most popular among console owners, specifically those who enjoyed Japanese imports. For example, Saturn collectors, who imported a lot of "Japanese shmups" - quite fascinating really, the whole lexical shift. Since there is often quite a dichotomy between console and home computer owners (such as those with a C64 or Amiga), and a word that originated (and maybe died out?) in the one group, was adopted quite seriously by another. Another word combination among Japanese games importers is "Hori Shmup", or horizontal shoot-em-up. It's very possible that the gaming circle you moved in didn't use the word. Well, most of this is just casual chit chat of course, since it probably falls under "personal research", the whole movement of the word from one group to another, but it's definately used by many varied groups today. Is there a "gaming terminology" page on Wikipedia, just out of curiosity?

No. There's a whole category. :) Category:Computer and video game gameplay. This used to be the 'terminology' category, but the categories have broadened; Category:Computer and video games may have something more relevant to this particular term. Spottedowl 01:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have never heard of "Shmup" until just a few hours ago, and then I looked on here, and I find that people are already in the middle of a dispute about it. I've been gaming for 20 years, and reading magazines on them for about 15 of those. I'm american, but I have several friends with same interests from the UK. Not a single one of them has heard of the term before. It seems as if a VERY small group of people is really trying to push this word into the modern lexicon, which is why the only recent source is in a single website. I personally think that "Shmup" should be removed from most of the article and maybe have a small mention of it in the main description with a statement that explains that it is occassionally referred to as such. JoeyFNK 19:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm tending to agree here. Even a google search barely shows any use of the word. Just because someone made a website using the word doesn't mean its notable. Anyone can pay a few bucks to register and host a website. Its been here forever and if you search it, this is one of the top results for it. It seems like an attempt to define a neologism WP:NEO. As such I'm going to be bold and remove it.--58.230.124.16 (talk) 17:04, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Shump" isn't used by anybody anywhere. The average gamer calls this genre a SHOOTER, as do all magazines I have published from the 1980s and 1990s. (Those magazines are EGM, Nintendo Power, Sega Visions, Computer Games, Game Players, Next Generation, GamePro, Die Hard Game Fan, etc. I have thousands of issues of these titles, "shump" IS NEVER USED, nor is "shoot 'em up"!) It was Fragmaster as the webmaster of www.classicgaming.com that posted a link, I think in 1999 or thereabouts, calling for "shumps", but walk into a game store and ask for a "shump". You might be told that it's not politically correct, or that it's a family store, or, my favorite, what in the hell are you talking about? No, it's been called "shooter" for over three decades now, and not "shoot 'em up" or "shump". For that, this article needs to be re-written from a Joe Blow POV and back-up with the print archives (which means going to a main city library) and reading reviews of EGM's Review Crew, or Nintendo Power's Now Playing articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coffee4binky (talk • contribs) 23:10, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's worth noting that "shoot 'em up"/"shmup" is a colloquialism. The proper term amongst enthusiasts is "shooting game", which should be differentiated from "shooters" (first-person, third-person, light gun). The title and content of the article should be changed to show this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by STGfan (talk • contribs) 23:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bad History

Asteroids and Space Invaders are both greatly predated by MIT Space War. Heck, by the time Asteroids came out, people on the PLATO network were already playing Empire; 30 players dogfighting in 2D over a nationwide terminal network. Akb4 10:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. SpaceWar should at least be mentionned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.66.116.114 (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We've always had a little problem deciding just what is a shoot 'em up and what isn't: I think the article currently reflects this indecision. I used to think that scrolling shooters like R-Type were 'true' shoot 'em ups, and games like Space Invaders were just 'kind of shooty games'. I have known, however, that at the moment the article is inaccurate; for example, if Asteroids is a multidirectional shooter, then Computer Space (according to its article) predates it by a number of years.

This Empire thing is intriguing, I've never heard of it before. Spottedowl 17:43, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About axes of movement

How's that? More than two axes? What is this?? Shoot'em ups are 2D, aren't they?? The controlled vehicle can have more than 2 DOFs, yes, but that's another story... --Alexander Ivashkin 17:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the term 'shoot 'em up'

From the article: These games were traditionally just called "shooters,"[citation needed] but with the advent of new technology, new genres emerged like first person shooters, rail shooters and third person shooters, and the "shoot 'em up" term came to indicate this narrower school of design.[citation needed] This is sometimes shortened to "shmup."

That's total bollocks. The term shoot 'em up was around in 1980, describing the likes of Defender, and that most definitely pre-dates any third-person shoot 'em ups.

Shoot-em-up Construction Kit

An article on shmups wouldn't be complete without a brief mention of, or at least a link to SEUCK and the spate of appalling shmups that followed over the next year or two... 87.194.195.109 23:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Salamander 02.png

Image:Salamander 02.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename sub-categories

I suggest the sub-categories to Category:Shoot 'em ups be renamed to "XXXX shmups" or "XXXX shoot 'em ups" to avoid confusion with other, non-shmup shooters. SharkD (talk) 08:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:GyrussArcade.png

Image:GyrussArcade.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Salamander 02.png

Image:Salamander 02.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Stinger (arcade game).png

Image:Stinger (arcade game).png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Zaxxon game.png

Image:Zaxxon game.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was merge four articles into shoot 'em up and clean up the article. Randomran (talk) 22:41, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Run and gun is an article that covers essentially the same subject matter as shoot em up. It's totally unreferenced. I suspect it's a synonym. I would suggest merging/redirecting this page to shoot 'em up.

Top-down shooter also seems entirely redundant with shoot em up. There's no additional information beyond what you can find in the multidirectional shooter section of shoot em up. I also suggest merging/redirecting this page to shoot 'em up.

Feel free to post thoughts on either / both. Right now, the video game genre template is a mess with how many different names we have for shooters. Randomran (talk) 20:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Run and Gun is a term I've had no knowledge of before finding it here, 'platform shoot-em-up' is what they're often called here in the UK. Top down shooter is as irrelevant as scrolling shooter in terms of separate articles - they're both just shoot em ups, one with the camera pointing down and the other where the screen scrolls (as it can in other action genres). I'd support merge and redirect of them both. Have you posted this on the WP:VG talk page? Someone another 02:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I posted a note at the WP:VG talk page to get more input. Randomran (talk) 16:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question, what is the difference between run and gun, top-down shooter, shoot 'em up, and shooter game? As far as I can tell, they share enough to all be in the same article. I could be wrong though. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Run and gun = platform/shoot em up hybrid. Shooter game = massively broad term which incorporates basically any kind of blasting game, including light-gun games, FPS, third person shooters and shoot em ups. Top down shooter = Commando (video game) and the like, it's just a shoot em up seen from a particular angle. Shoot em up = simplistic, arcade-style shooting game. The term evolved with and is most strongly tied to vertical and horizontal scrolling shooters, but also incorporates the old 'fixed' shooters too. The only problem that's really arisen is the splintering of shoot em ups - horizontal/vertical/top-down (overhead)/scrolling/fixed - these are all just different types of shoot em up that have evolved and stuck long enough to have multiple examples of each. Rather than having different articles for each, these are just as easily dealt with in the shoot em ups article and classified separately via categories. Someone another 22:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's a fair way of putting it. We do need the broad "shooter" category to describe the numerous games that involve guns and lasers and what not. But not every difference in viewpoint constitutes a whole new genre. So you're flying up-down instead of running left-right. Run and gun versus top-down shooter probably amounts to a few sentences to describe the different gameplay. Shoot em up pretty much describes most of the 2D shooters (which for all the differences in viewpoint aside play exactly the same way). Randomran (talk) 22:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Add scrolling shooter to the mess. One more excessive article to consider. Randomran (talk) 22:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really have an opinion either way, but if they are merged, then rail shooter should be merged also. Bridies (talk) 21:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair point to raise. But are all rail shooters considered shoot 'em ups? Legitimate question. I honestly don't know. Randomran (talk) 21:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would think so. They're pretty much the same idea as scrolling shooters, except that the character 'scrolls' forward into the screen, rather than accross it (side scroller) or from bottom to top (top-down scroller). Bridies (talk) 22:04, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of simplicity, I'd say it'd be best to merge it as well. I agree with Bridies, most rail shooters are basically scrolling shooters from a first person perspective. Plus, all of the information in it is unsourced and borders on original research. Though I don't know if merging them all will really fix that. :-| (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks guys. Alright, I'm gonna take on "Rail shooter" as well, and do a merge and a cleanup. But I'm gonna wait a week, maybe a few before I do it. This is a big merge, so I want to give people a legitimate chance to weigh in. Randomran (talk) 22:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a very prudent plan. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:22, 30 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Take a quick glance at the articles and discussions to get a sense for why these mergers might be necessary. I'd like to build a consensus to organize this creep of unnecessary genre articles. Randomran (talk) 16:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I say go for it. The genre articles are growing to ridiculous proportions. Just last week we had to delete "Cartoon Shooter" or something like that. What's next? "Bear and bird action platformers with shiny golden puzzle thingys"? .:Alex :. 15:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Thanks everyone for checking in. The overwhelming consensus was to consolidate these different shoot 'em up articles which had a lot of redundant information, and a lot of poorly written detail. Admittedly, the result isn't pretty. But it's better than what we had before. Randomran (talk) 22:41, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Asteroi1.png

The image Image:Asteroi1.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Shoot em ups

As I have come to notice... there is no 'list of shoot em ups'... and while I understand this would be a daunting task, it is one I would like to see persued... I would kick it off... but I have never started an article here... and I don't know an extensive list of games of the genre either. Obviously if such a article were started, we would have to move the small list of such games here into it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.173.174.184 (talk) 00:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to wikipedia. You should make yourself an account and create a list of shoot 'em up games article. I'd definitely support someone creating such an article. Randomran (talk) 00:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it should be List of shoot 'em up video games?Asher196 (talk) 01:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter too much, but "video" isn't really necessary. See [:Category:Video_game_lists_by_genre]. We generally add "video games" if we're trying to distinguish from board games or tabletop games. But since there are no shoot 'em up board games, we really only have to say "shoot 'em up games". Randomran (talk) 01:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is already a Category:Shoot 'em ups, would this just be a matter of copying the category list to an article?Asher196 (talk) 02:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would definitely be a great place to start, IMO. Randomran (talk) 02:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Run n Gun redirects?

Apparently going for "run n gun" redirects to this page, yet I think that genre deserves it's own page? While they are related in the sense a lot are about going across the screen a shooting, run n gun usually has a lot of unique elements and most especially brings in a lot of platforming elements, it's like a hybrid of the two. Games like Metal Slug, Contra and Gunstar Heroes would fall under this genre type. Little to no mention are made of them in this article.

I wanted to find more information on the genre type and find more games like it, but neither is available for me to pursue here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.60.50 (talk) 19:08, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not every subject has enough information to warrant its own article. Run n gun is still basically a shoot 'em up. This article does mention run n' guns. If someone wants to add further information to shoot 'em up, they are welcome to do so. But the merge was the product of a discussion of numerous people (see ~~below~~above) and should not be undone by only one editor. If you are interested in seeing a list of run and gun games, you can examine the Category:Run_and_gun_games. Randomran (talk) 21:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this subject has as much information to warrant its own article as shoot 'em ups do, as it contains a large variety of gameplay differences from both shoot 'em ups and platforming games while retaining elements of both and it also has about the same amount of games. Is it even possible to contest a discussion and start a new one? I see it now redirects to multi-directional shooter, which these games are not as the article implies. Really, I think the idea to merge to begin with and the stance on the genre as it is now is bred entirely out of ignorance of the genre. People who don't know what things are making decisions on them. That is one thing I am very tired of seeing on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.60.50 (talk) 22:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you summed up run and gun games right there, actually. And if you read the description on multidirectional shooter, all that information is there. It's not to say that run and gun games aren't distinct. It's that you really can't write that much about it that isn't redundant with other shoot 'em ups: there's bosses, enemies, you shoot at them, you dodge them, with the key distinction that you run and (sometimes) jump. This merge was the product of a discussion with several highly active and knowledgeable members of the video games wikiproject. Not that expertise really matters, but you can't claim they did this out of ignorance. Randomran (talk) 22:50, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The description for multi-directional shooter fits games like Geometry Wars and Robotron than it does the wide amount of run and gun games. On top of that Run and gun's history and game play design is completely missing from that and the introduction to the article and the history portion of the article.

"I suspect it's a synonym." "Quick question, what is the difference between run and gun, top-down shooter, shoot 'em up, and shooter game? As far as I can tell, they share enough to all be in the same article. I could be wrong though."

Those don't sound to me like people who have an understanding on the genre. The whole discussion seems more like people identifying genres with poor articles that have vaguely similar game play and just smashing them together for the purpose of having less articles, instead of having more knowledge. Nothing about the run and gun article was even merged over in the slightest, it was all deleted and replaced with a redirect. The shoot em up article is written almost entirely on a wholly separate genre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.60.50 (talk) 23:04, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read the rest of the article. A lot of the general information about weapons, enemies, and so on came from the run and gun article. Just because one of the editors didn't have a complete grasp of the article doesn't invalidate the discussion by numerous other editors. Randomran (talk) 23:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I still think the game genre is too far different with its own long and detailed history to just be wedged in here. I would like to hold another discussion to unmerge them. Especially if something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_game can validate for an article with enough information to live. I also think the original merge was senseless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.60.50 (talk) 03:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Programming game gets its own article because there's virtually nothing else like it. If a programming game was a subgenre of a broader genre, then we would merge that too. Run and gun is made up of 90% of the features of a shoot em up, and shares a common history with other shoot em ups. That's why it was merged into this article. Not killed. Merged. Randomran (talk) 03:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't this article cover way to many distinct genres?

Everything from Run 'n' Gun to Rail Shooter redirects here (with little mention of either). It seems someone decided every game where shooting is a central element is a shoot 'em up. Really, I'm surprised someone hasn't proposed merging this article with First Person Shooter.

Me again a minute later: I just discovered that this article[1] has much more detailed information on both Rail Shooters and the Run 'n' Gun genre, yet the links in that article point here. That just can't be right. I think the issue here is people confusing Shooter Games with the shoot 'em up genre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.208.148.119 (talk) 08:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'shooter' is just a massively broad term that encompasses any kind of game with guns, so it's probably legit to have both articles, even if they are somewhat duplicative. Bridies (talk) 10:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's legit to have Run 'n' Gun or Rail Shooter included in this article since in shoot 'em ups you control a flying object and shoot enemies (or similar to this description). Wikipedia is all about citing sources, I know, and I'll try to find some on that, but I doubt there are "verifiable" sources saying Run 'n' Gun or Rail Shooter is a shoot 'em up sub-genre. For example, this list includes no other games than ones that fit my description, and this site, dedicated to shoot 'em ups, talks only about such games as well, no Run 'n' Gun or Rail Shooter is mentioned.

It's not that these aren't distinct categories. It's that there's a consensus that this is the best way to organize the information. All these different genres share common gameplay of controlling a person or vehicle that shoots at stuff, collects weapon and armor power ups, tries to avoid getting hit, and so on. What else can you say about a scrolling shooter other than that it's a shoot 'em up that scrolls left-to-right or bottom-to-top? The best strategy is to gradually expand the subsections within this article. If one of these subsections begins to have so much distinct information that it cannot fit here, then there will probably be much more support for a split. Randomran (talk) 19:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You control flying characters (spaceships etc) in rail shooters. Run and gun are side-scrollers with some platforming elements (contra etc), or apparently so; I haven't even managed to verify that term yet. You may have a point, I'm still to find sources for all the unverified stuff in this article (I'll look at the other shooter article also). Removing the rail shooter and run n gun sections would make this article even shorter though. Bridies (talk) 09:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

House of the Dead and Virtua Cop are Rail Shooters, I don't know of any Rail Shooter where you fly, but even with flying Rail Shooter is not a Shmup sub-genre, thus it doesn't belong here, the same goes for Run 'n' Gun. Bringing attention to this article from Shmup communities might help it I think. Anyone a member of any such community? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.208.148.119 (talk) 11:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then how about Run 'n' Gun and Rail Shooter is left out from this article and redirected to their sections in the Shooter game article? It would make more sense I think. ... I just noticed Run 'n' Gun has been moved from that article to this one. I don't agree with that change. Also, why is Rail Shooter and Tube Shooter in the same section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.208.148.119 (talk) 05:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I split run and gun from the section on multidirectional shooters. The information was there. I just went into a bit more detail gave its own heading. The shooter article describes all shooter games in general, including various 3D shooters. Randomran (talk) 05:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Some of the information was recently removed from the Shooter game article, sorry about the misunderstanding. I still think it belongs in that article rather than this one however. It's a long stretch to say Run 'n' Gun is a Shmup sub-genre, and outright silly to claim that Rail Shooter is. To quote Randomran above: "All these different genres share common gameplay of controlling a person or vehicle that shoots at stuff", Rail Shooter doesn't even fit this definition. Also, shouldn't this be an article on Shoot 'em ups rather than different genres where you control a person or vehicle that shoots at stuff? I still think a lot of this is a result of people confusing Shoot 'em ups with shooter games. The name of this article seems strange at the moment.

From one of the sources in the article: Bloody Wolf is an exciting run-and-gun shoot-'em-up that's held back by the absence of a two-player option. Bridies (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did copy/paste the run n gun section into the shooter article anyway. Bridies (talk) 12:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The genre articles need a lot of work. Shoot em ups are just a type of shooter, which includes first person shooters, third person shooters, and tactical shooters as well. Bridies is doing a pretty good job of actually researching and cleaning up this article. It's hard work, but eventually the important articles get the help they need. Randomran (talk) 17:07, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Knife Edge: Nose Gunner, reference for rail shooter as shoot 'em up (has 'genre: shoot 'em up' at the side). Not the best source but it'll do for now. Bridies (talk) 21:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There used to be a pretty big article on scrolling shooters

I'm going to restore Scrolling shooter and link to it from here. If there is only going to be a summary sentence on the topics here, the other article doesn't need to be removed. It warrants its own article in my opinion. Habanero-tan (talk) 01:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to build a consensus for a split. There was consensus to merge the articles a while ago. Randomran (talk) 01:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see: Talk:Shoot_'em_up#Merger_proposal. Well here's the old content if anyone wants to add it in: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scrolling_shooter&oldid=251465022 . Habanero-tan (talk) 03:15, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the information is already in there. The defining features of a scrolling shooter is the scrolling. Everything else -- the history, the powerups, the dodging and shooting -- are already covered in the other general parts of this article. Randomran (talk) 06:33, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing them all squished into one genre has shattered my reality Habanero-tan (talk) 07:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]