Hi, I'm a game dev interested in all sorts of action games but primarily shmups and beat 'em ups right now.

Working on Armed Decobot, beat 'em up/shmup hybrid atm. Was the game designer on Gunvein & Mechanical Star Astra (on hold).

This is my blog, a low-stakes space where I can sort out messy thoughts without worrying too much about verifying anything. You shouldn't trust me about statistical claims or even specific examples, in fact don't trust me about anything, take it in and think for yourself 😎

Most posts are general but if I'm posting about something, it probably relates to my own gamedev in one way or another.


🕹️ My Games
boghog.itch.io/
🎙️ Game Design Vids & Streams
www.youtube.com/@boghogSTG
☠️ Small Updates + Dumb Takes
twitter.com/boghogooo

I've been fucking around with a combo counter in Armed Decobot mostly for fun. I'm not too serious about its implementation but here's an interesting question that came to mind when messing around with it :

What are the combo counters actually trying to test?

These counters, while existing in other forms for ages, are mostly influenced by fighting games, or shmups which are themselves influenced by fighting games (DP's chaining was influenced by SF's combos). In fighting games, what they're testing is relatively clear - it's the player's knowledge of states, moves, hitstun durations, etc. both for their character & their opponent. It's basically testing your ability to navigate a bunch of states. It more or less directly corresponds to what the games are about

Once you take that mechanic, rip it out of fighting games, and bring it into beat em ups however things become a lot less clear. On the surface, it might look like you're still testing the same thing, but that's not really true anymore. The first issue is simply that hitstun states are pretty free in beat em ups - they are lengthy, they are pretty easy to get & enemies don't immediately punish you if you're a little bit late. The main challenge is getting hit by other enemies, not the one you're attacking. Hell, the games often barely even have anti-infinite systems of any kind.

The second and perhaps bigger issue is how these games tend to handle hit counting. A single attack hitting multiple enemies counts as several hits, thus the more clumped up enemies are the easier it becomes to build (though not necessarily sustain) the combo. The skill being tested shifts towards grouping enemies, and general crowd control. The more strict the combo system, the more rewarding grouping becomes as well.

But this isn't solved if you make it so that 1 punch landing = 1 hit, no matter how many enemies it hits. Because now as soon as a hit lands on more than 1 enemy, you've fucked up because you wasted a valuable resource - the enemy's HP. The game's logic then dictates that the proper way to play is split up enemies - simply a different kind of crowd control.

This problem is less extreme in shmups because these counters test your ability to link together attacks & enemy kills, which are static. There's no conflict between the game itself & the chaining system like there is in bmups (where enemies move around & away, and your goal is to control their positioning).

I think this weird conflict is why combo counters in beat em ups always felt "off" to me while playing. It feels like a system that doesn't truly know what it's going for. I don't really have any kinda solutions to this, but it's definitely interesting to think about how to repurpose this mechanic in the bmup context.

Also watch Anthopants' SOR4 runs they're the funniest shit ever


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @boghog's post:

This is only tangentially similar, but it reminds me a bit of one of my only real criticisms of Odin Sphere PS2: It has a ranking system for fights, and the higher your rank, the better the spoils you get, which includes money, seeds, and so on. The problem? The two criteria are time and damage taken, with a perfect 500 points in each required for an S rank.

I think ranking time is fine (and interestingly enough, you can concoct a potion that resets the timer to zero when you drink it), but ranking damage feels odd because growing food and increasing your health is half the RPG systems of the game: Why communicate that this robust system that feels cohesive with the whole and fun to engage with would, ideally, not matter at all? Your HP means nothing if you aren't getting hit, and the spoils almost always include seeds or food outright, which only matter for preserving and increasing max health, which feels like a real contradiction of the game's identity.

I think if it was JUST a ranking system not attached to things that tangibly affect your progression and difficulty in the game, that'd be okay. Or if it ranked on damage, but the S-rank par wasn't literally perfect no damage. But as it stands, it feels like the ranking system muddies the game's formalized incentives just a bit.

Does it have scoring beyond S ranks? I guess the way this could be balanced is the way Dodonpachi balances it. It has crutches in the form of bombs, which get massively discouraged by score cause if you max out your bombs you get tick points each frame which add up to a lot. But if a game caps out at S rank then a lot of this stuff starts breaking yeah, otherwise you could add a mechanic where you can turn all that food or what have you into even more puntos somehow.

It caps out at S. You can get up to 500 points for meeting the individual par time, and 500 points for not receiving damage. And their sum determines your rank, with 1000 points being S, and anything lower being A, B, etc at the appropriate thresholds.

Basically, imagine if Bayonetta removed scoring entirely and based everything just on rank for time spent and damage taken, with points only being relevant as a representation of what rank it nets you.

There's also an interesting forgiveness mechanic where points roll over: Let's say A rank requires 850 points and S rank requires 1000 (the max you can normally get). Now let's say you get 999 points. You get A rank, but now you have 149 rollover points.

Now let's say on the next fight you only get 860 points. That would normally be A rank, but you have 149 rollover points, which brings you to 1009. This means you get an S rank, and still have 9 rollover points to use for next time.

In summation, any points you accrue above the requirement for the rank you get is saved as rollover, which gives some player forgiveness for future ranking.

But again: As far as actual scoring goes, 1000 points for S rank is the highest you can attain, rollover points (which require you to get lower than S rank to accrue) aside.

You can use the food and seeds to concoct potions, many of which are offensive in nature, so technically you can still use your rewards for things besides healing and HP growth. But there's still the problem of this ranking system pushing against the game's actual existence as wanting and needing you to focus on the whole suite of character growth, rather than just one.

Oh one more detail I forgot to mention is that multiple characters can block, and blocking has chip damage. Which further makes it feel odd. Why would they include a ranking system which invalidates the player's primary defensive action? It doesn't feel intentional at all.

The rollover mechanic is pretty interesting actually, if the game has a full game ranking I could see that being nice cause doing better would let you compensate for shittier performance, so the game wouldn't weigh a single fight/mistake really heavily

I do think the rollover mechanic is super interesting; I just don't think the ranking system is robust or considered enough for it to really shine.

The game doesn't remember ranks at all; actually. It just ranks you in the moment, shows it on your map (I think?) while still in that area, and then prompty forgets lol.

One of the good things about the remake IMO is they completely rebuild the ranking system to work like the single player scoring in the older Super Smash Bros. games, where you get a bonus for every little special interaction you pull off (50 points for a cheap shot, 100 for getting a chain of at least 100 hits, etc). This makes it so taking damage and getting good rank is still viable.

Problem is, you STILL start at a default of 500 points for par time and 500 points for no damage with the S rank requirement still being 1000... meaning that you're starting OUT with S rank in a fight, and are almost certain to get an S-rank in the end with all your score bonuses. I can count on one hand the amount of times I didn't get an S rank so far, and I'm really not even trying (though I reset when missing the S rank because why not; they're so easy). They traded the ranking system being misguided for it being too easy. 💀

In my ideal world, you would start with a default of zero points, and what are currently the bonus points would literally just be THE points you get to build up to a hopeful S-rank. Making the ranking harder would really encourage engagement with the game's systems, because goodness, the remake is SO maximalist in terms of action and RPG moves and mechanics, but is also much easier and less cohesive in terms of requiring your engagement with them.