I was looking forward to this game. Very much in fact; it was probably my most wanted game of 2007.

And during my initial co-op sessions with KillahDude, we were having tons of fun and constantly commenting on how much we loved the game and how it improved on Reloaded.

However, the more we played, the more annoyed we both got. With pretty much everything in the game. From the enemy emplacements, to the level designs, the crappy and enormous hit box making advanced bullet-dodging impossible and the unplayable black belt difficulty level and of course its now-gimped achievement, I think I hate everything about this game.

Insanely disappointed. I can see how low-level players (not meant insultingly) would have a lot of fun with lower difficulty levels and less knowledge about what's broken here, but I'm curious what other Grandmasters think about this.

---

85 200/200
05 250/250
01 235/235
01 215/215
01 150/200

Well, after a first glance, I have to say I'm disappointed too. :(

The game doesn't flow nearly as well as MSR. There are way too few levels, no achievements for Talley Mode at all, and the achievements look to be fairly easily acquired. Altho I still lack 2 achievements in MSR, this game looks to be a lot easier and just doesn't live up to the crazy hardness I love with MSR. I won't be near as proud of these achievements as I already am of the ones I have in MSR.

At the moment I'm in the process of BlackBelting all the levels in Talley mode of MSR, just for fun. It's one of my favorite games.

It's possible that after more play my opinion on Empire may change, but I seriously doubt it. So far the only improvement I can see is the 2 player online feature which would be SO awesome in MSR....

I guess some people would like the easier achievements, but the replay value doesn't appear to be up to par from what I've seen up to this point.

Yeah, I can see what you are saying. It is a good game but after a while it does become a little old and very ANNOYING. The whole no time bonus thing gets me on tally gets me. Now all you have to do is be the best camper and you are set. And doing black belt is next to impossible on some of the levels. All in all, it's a good game, but it could be better.

---

The 7th MSR Black Belt Grandmaster.

You pretty much summed it all up.

It's almost heartbreaking to see how Pom Pom left the hardcore fan base out in the rain, making the sequel to one of the most prestigious achievements ever boring and as far from prestigious as possible.

 

The "Heck, I'll give it one more go!"-feeling is also nowhere to be found. Instead I find myself wanting to finish the darn game off so I can put it in my 200/200-folder, never to be played again.

Ya it has turned into a "campers paradise".Tally is messed up and the new difficulty and heavy use of beastie combos is annoying.If they could have added coop in msr it would be better then this.C0op is the only good improvement Imo.

---

Cant wait for GH World Tour and Gears 2!
Msg me for Halo 3 deals.
Still #1 in Mutant Storm Reloaded!

Huh?  You're declaring Black Belt unplayably hard after one day?  That seems ridiculous.

With practice and good strategy, I could definitely see someone going through the entire game on Black Belt, start to finish.  Perhaps not without dying... but who knows what'll be possible?

I think the only reason for disappointment is if you were expecting the game mechanics to be exactly the same as MSR.  Why not learn the new game instead of complaining about what's changed?  Just because you were good at MSR doesn't uniquely qualify you to judge this one. :)

It is a pity that there's no hard achievement, though.  Both Hexic 2 and MSE were big steps down in difficulty from their forebears, achievement-wise.

Yeah, REAllY dissappointed!!!! I'm in no rush to get blackbelt. This is way too easy and nowhere near as enjoyable as MSR. Grandmaster (GM)is nowhere near as hard (basically whoever buys the game first, and is good and spends the day on it, will get the GM ,and it's wayyyyyyy too short)...Kool concept but they could have done better. I played it this morning and i'm in no rush to play it tonight.

---

" A Game Junkie At His Finest"
650+ games and 27 systems

 Vagrant Pistol wrote:

Yeah, REAllY dissappointed!!!! I'm in no rush to get blackbelt. This is way too easy and nowhere near as enjoyable as MSR. Grandmaster (GM)is nowhere near as hard (basically whoever buys the game first, and is good and spends the day on it, will get the GM ,and it's wayyyyyyy too short)...Kool concept but they could have done better. I played it this morning and i'm in no rush to play it tonight.

yep ive been busy all day...had fun with zombies in halo...this weekend i hope to tie loose ends in empires...

---

Cant wait for GH World Tour and Gears 2!
Msg me for Halo 3 deals.
Still #1 in Mutant Storm Reloaded!

i'm having fun w/ it. beastie combos are a bit annoying though. this grandmaster looks a lot more doable than the first.:)         i know it wont last, but i was #6 at 6,000,000 points. in a day or 2 i know that wont be a very high score ;P

---

61 x 200/200 XBLA
Life is short. Play.

shoot the fish in the balls. yeah, the blue balls. lol

---

61 x 200/200 XBLA
Life is short. Play.

 SnapDragon wrote:

Huh?  You're declaring Black Belt unplayably hard after one day?  That seems ridiculous.

With practice and good strategy, I could definitely see someone going through the entire game on Black Belt, start to finish.  Perhaps not without dying... but who knows what'll be possible?

I think the only reason for disappointment is if you were expecting the game mechanics to be exactly the same as MSR.  Why not learn the new game instead of complaining about what's changed?  Just because you were good at MSR doesn't uniquely qualify you to judge this one. :)

It is a pity that there's no hard achievement, though.  Both Hexic 2 and MSE were big steps down in difficulty from their forebears, achievement-wise.

 

The problem with the levels now is that they're basically adapted for co-op play, you can't apply the same sneaky tactics and slick movement as we all used in MSR. For example the levels with the generators. What were they thinking reducing the spawntime of things comming from the generator to 0.000001 seconds? It sort of removes the tactic element where you kill the spawn and then go for the generator, instead it leaves you fighting for your life while time is running out!

 SnapDragon wrote:

I think the only reason for disappointment is if you were expecting the game mechanics to be exactly the same as MSR.  Why not learn the new game instead of complaining about what's changed?  Just because you were good at MSR doesn't uniquely qualify you to judge this one. :)

That's what I think the problem is; the game mechanics are the same as in MSR, except they only stripped stuff off and didn't really add anything. I mean, they increased focus on beastie combos -- which is a good idea -- but they were already there in MSR.

What they took away, in essence, was the good level design. A level in MSR could be tackled in many different ways, depending on what your strengths and weaknesses are. I know I suck with the fast-flying enemies, so I always bomb one of them on levels 41 and 51, whereas other people kick their *** but can't clear level 16 without dropping a bomb, etcetera. I don't really see any of that freeform or depth in Empire, because of the level design. Pretty much every room -- except those couple of really long sidescrolling ones -- is just doors open; enemies come out; you stand still and shoot and dodge their shots; win.

The level design is also what I'm talking about when I call black belt unplayable -- and by that, I mean it is quite clearly heavily skewed towards co-op play, and they kinda forgot to test it out fully in singleplayer. There never were spots in MSR where it was just like, oh my god, this room is god damn unbeatable without at least taking a hit or using the laser.

A great example, I think, is world 4 level 3 room 4. One of those enemies that looks like the car in Knight Rider spawns exactly opposite of the generator. If you kill him, he instantly respawns. He follows you closely, and if you fire at him he only goes a few inches away (unlike the previous room, where you can "control" him). In single, it's not impossible, but there's no real strategy there at all. You, again, basically push him into a corner and stand still and fire at the generator doors while dodging his shots. You can't do anything smart like going to the other side of the level and tricking him into hiding there or anything, as he's too smart for that and will always follow you. The design here is quite clearly for two players; one distracts KITT, the other destroys the generator.

Not impossible, but like I said, heavily skewed towards co-op play, and that's just one example that I think makes my point very clear. I feel the entire game stays in the same vein.

---

85 200/200
05 250/250
01 235/235
01 215/215
01 150/200

Yeah, I have to say also really dissapointed with Empires. Tally mode is a complete joke, ( May the best camper win).  The tactical strategy you had to use on reloaded is thrown out the window. So you could suck at this game and still be in the top 10.

I also hate the way some of this rooms are designed, there just horrible. Some of this rooms are so packed with things everywhere that there is no way to manuever. So you end up in a corner with like 30 shots going at you, and there is simply no way to go. Horrible level design.

Empire is good, but nowhere close to the great game that is Mutant Storm Reloaded. 

 

---

Mutant Storm Tally 2nd Place, Adventure 3d place, 161 million.

25 Million, YOU WILL BE MINE!!!!!!. Currently 24,968,000

Ok, I see what you mean.  Maybe you're right, that this game isn't as good as MSR.  But I do think it should be judged on its own merits, since the mechanics are different in almost every way.

Are you referring to world 4 level 1 room 4?  (Isn't 4-1 where you have to break down the doors?)  You CAN distract that enemy and get him to the other side; that's how I do it.  (He comes back, but not before you can power through the doors.)

I agree that there are levels that seem impossible (right now) without using your special weapon... but why exclude using your special weapon?  It's an important part of the game, and I'm sure the top scorers will end up making optimal use of it. :)

They should've split up each stage into it's own room on tally mode and made a lot of rooms instead of a few levels. That would make it a lot more like the old tally mode, but then again, this is Empire, not Reloaded.

---

The 7th MSR Black Belt Grandmaster.

Well I finally decided to purchase Reloaded for now, Empire just looked a little tedious, but I'll probably pick it up later.

Had a good laugh after my first game on leaderboards when I saw Infrared2yahead, and a few others here.  I think I got to level 15 with about 400,000 ;-)

 SnapDragon wrote:

Ok, I see what you mean.  Maybe you're right, that this game isn't as good as MSR.  But I do think it should be judged on its own merits, since the mechanics are different in almost every way.

Are you referring to world 4 level 1 room 4?  (Isn't 4-1 where you have to break down the doors?)  You CAN distract that enemy and get him to the other side; that's how I do it.  (He comes back, but not before you can power through the doors.)

I agree that there are levels that seem impossible (right now) without using your special weapon... but why exclude using your special weapon?  It's an important part of the game, and I'm sure the top scorers will end up making optimal use of it. :)

Well, it's a sequel so I really don't see how you could possibly argue that it should be judged completely unrelated to its prequels. It carries with it a heritage of good shooting, and more relevant to this discussion; good level design, and when the sequel doesn't deliver on these points, I think it should be berated a little extra because the same group of people have accomplished much better in the past.

And, yeah, 4-1-4 is what I meant. I have never managed to trick him like that, he always comes right back. It was just one example anyway, and I'm too tired right now to think of more counter-examples. I'll just say that I think the same thing applies to many, many other rooms, to varying degrees.

I exclude the super weapon because of two reasons, one being the fact that super weapons and bombs in shooters should be for panic situations. You should be able to save for when you really need them, and not be forced to use them through crappy level design. Second reason is the fact that you get bonus points for not using it. If you're basically forced to use it, you've been robbed of some of your score which is not cool.

---

85 200/200
05 250/250
01 235/235
01 215/215
01 150/200

I played MSE at 5am on Wednesday, went back to bed at 7am kinda disappointed. It looks really nice, and some of the Mutants are kinda cool, but it just doesn't have the same kind of rush that MSR had. I haven't had a lot of time to play anything lately, but I'll probably find some time next week to give it a workout.

Just play Lvl 89 of MSR on Black Belt... that'll get your pulse racing and palms sweaty... just not happening in MSE.

The lack of a decent follow up to GW:RE on Xbox Live (Galaxies is coming, maybe it'll be decent...) and now MSE kinda lacking something is disappointing. Do I have to go write a decent arcade shooter myself??

 

Ok I was finally able to spend an hour or so with the game.  I have a few comments.

Some of you may be disappointed (as the MSR hardcore that you are) but clearly A LOT more work went into this sequel from the developers end.  I hope you can recognize this and appreciate their efforts in that regard.  Lots of the AI is original and context sensitive, as are the levels.  This requires a great deal more thought, effort and hard work to pull off from a development standpoint.

In theory I'm not jumping on the bandwagon yet: declaring this a "disappointment" -  even for the hardcore players.  While you may be disappointed that you can't be "clever" and come up with original solutions to the games problem(s), this game rewards outright "skill" as much or more than the other game.  Shouldn't hardcore games be about this? 

Either you have an ability to dodge and shoot things better than someone else... or you don't.  Think about Tetris.  That's an ability - it's all in the genes with a little hard work to supplement it. I don't think the "system" in the new game is better, but the nature of the AI enemies is why I'm calling this game hardcore.  For the ulitmate MS game, I'd simply take the system of the old game, and spice it up with all the new enemies in this game (and then some), and put a little more thought into each of the arena's.

Furthermore, maybe it botheres you that there is a ton of annoying ways to get your score higher?  ;)

The bottom line is I think it's a little preliminary to just shoot down the game at this point.

 Triplethreat99 wrote:

Yeah, I have to say also really dissapointed with Empires. Tally mode is a complete joke, ( May the best camper win). 

And since when did it become easy to camp?  You act as if anybody can just sit on a level buzzing with enemies and shoot them all down no problem?

It is a rather goofy way to score points, but only a skilled player will be able to do this.

 KitesAreFun wrote:

Ok I was finally able to spend an hour or so with the game.  I have a few comments.

Some of you may be disappointed (as the MSR hardcore that you are) but clearly A LOT more work went into this sequel from the developers end.  I hope you can recognize this and appreciate their efforts in that regard.  Lots of the AI is original and context sensitive, as are the levels.  This requires a great deal more thought, effort and hard work to pull off from a development standpoint.

In theory I'm not jumping on the bandwagon yet: declaring this a "disappointment" -  even for the hardcore players.  While you may be disappointed that you can't be "clever" and come up with original solutions to the games problem(s), this game rewards outright "skill" as much or more than the other game.  Shouldn't hardcore games be about this? 

Either you have an ability to dodge and shoot things better than someone else... or you don't.  Think about Tetris.  That's an ability - it's all in the genes with a little hard work to supplement it. I don't think the "system" in the new game is better, but the nature of the AI enemies is why I'm calling this game hardcore.  For the ulitmate MS game, I'd simply take the system of the old game, and spice it up with all the new enemies in this game (and then some), and put a little more thought into each of the arena's.

Furthermore, maybe it botheres you that there is a ton of ways to get your score higher?  Someone can combo better than you?  Someone found out the perfect timing to finish the level right as they get the max combos?  This game still has a lot of legs for the ones that want to maximize their potential.  For others, not so much.

The bottom line is I think it's a little preliminary to just shoot down the game at this point.

Nice post!with further playing of about 5-6 hours...I have grown to liking this game...especially the coop side...it is a different way to play...and with multiple leaderboards,it looks like ill be here awhile...so my second thoughts are,it may not be the original...but over time it should go down as a classic just like reloaded...

---

Cant wait for GH World Tour and Gears 2!
Msg me for Halo 3 deals.
Still #1 in Mutant Storm Reloaded!

 Infrared2yaHead wrote:

 KitesAreFun wrote:

Ok I was finally able to spend an hour or so with the game.  I have a few comments.

Some of you may be disappointed (as the MSR hardcore that you are) but clearly A LOT more work went into this sequel from the developers end.  I hope you can recognize this and appreciate their efforts in that regard.  Lots of the AI is original and context sensitive, as are the levels.  This requires a great deal more thought, effort and hard work to pull off from a development standpoint.

In theory I'm not jumping on the bandwagon yet: declaring this a "disappointment" -  even for the hardcore players.  While you may be disappointed that you can't be "clever" and come up with original solutions to the games problem(s), this game rewards outright "skill" as much or more than the other game.  Shouldn't hardcore games be about this? 

Either you have an ability to dodge and shoot things better than someone else... or you don't.  Think about Tetris.  That's an ability - it's all in the genes with a little hard work to supplement it. I don't think the "system" in the new game is better, but the nature of the AI enemies is why I'm calling this game hardcore.  For the ulitmate MS game, I'd simply take the system of the old game, and spice it up with all the new enemies in this game (and then some), and put a little more thought into each of the arena's.

Furthermore, maybe it botheres you that there is a ton of ways to get your score higher?  Someone can combo better than you?  Someone found out the perfect timing to finish the level right as they get the max combos?  This game still has a lot of legs for the ones that want to maximize their potential.  For others, not so much.

The bottom line is I think it's a little preliminary to just shoot down the game at this point.

Nice post!with further playing of about 5-6 hours...I have grown to liking this game...especially the coop side...it is a different way to play...and with multiple leaderboards,it looks like ill be here awhile...so my second thoughts are,it may not be the original...but over time it should go down as a classic just like reloaded...

You quoted my old version heh :)  Oh well, we have two of my visions now!  Mozilla spell checker doesn't work on this board either.

In any case... I think the bottom line is that in the rankings you'll see a greater discrepancy between the top and the bottom of the rankings than the other game (skill variance).  I think the Oriental game of "GO" has the greatest skill curve in any game in history (including chess).

 DROGTURIST wrote:

A great example, I think, is world 4 level 3 room 4. One of those enemies that looks like the car in Knight Rider spawns exactly opposite of the generator. If you kill him, he instantly respawns. He follows you closely, and if you fire at him he only goes a few inches away (unlike the previous room, where you can "control" him). In single, it's not impossible, but there's no real strategy there at all. You, again, basically push him into a corner and stand still and fire at the generator doors while dodging his shots. You can't do anything smart like going to the other side of the level and tricking him into hiding there or anything, as he's too smart for that and will always follow you. The design here is quite clearly for two players; one distracts KITT, the other destroys the generator.

 

The fact that KITT follows you is the reason why the level is designed the way it is. The easy way to complete the level is to let KITT chase you around the oval, with you shooting the shields and generator as you pass them on every circuit of the oval you do. KITT only releases the small green enemies when you attack him, so the only real problem you have is avoiding his bullets on the back straight. When the generator is down you can take out the targetting enemies and then do KITT at your leisure.

---

You don't say.

 KitesAreFun wrote:

Some of you may be disappointed (as the MSR hardcore that you are) but clearly A LOT more work went into this sequel from the developers end.  I hope you can recognize this and appreciate their efforts in that regard.  Lots of the AI is original and context sensitive, as are the levels.  This requires a great deal more thought, effort and hard work to pull off from a development standpoint.

Well, the graphics alone let you know that this game had more hard work put into it. Does that make it better, though, or more worth the money? No, not really. The guys who do those shovelware Shrek games and whatnot are the hardest-working people in the industry (as they get insane deadlines, like 8 months to do a next-gen game). Doesn't mean we give them high review scores and the sales they really do deserve for putting in such hard work. That's not how the world works.

 KitesAreFun wrote:

While you may be disappointed that you can't be "clever" and come up with original solutions to the games problem(s), this game rewards outright "skill" as much or more than the other game.  Shouldn't hardcore games be about this?

I have zero clue what you're talking about here. You can't just say the game rewards skill when several skilled MSR players have already stated that they don't think so, not without posting some arguments or at least a clue to what your train of thought was here.

 KitesAreFun wrote:

I don't think the "system" in the new game is better, but the nature of the AI enemies is why I'm calling this game hardcore.

Again, I really have no idea what you're talking about. There is no "enemy AI" to speak of at all. Most enemies follow a set pattern that they always follow. The rest follow you, which is very simplistic behaviour I find hard to call 'artificial intelligence.' I mean, even games from the 70's had enemies following you.

 KitesAreFun wrote:

Furthermore, maybe it botheres you that there is a ton of annoying ways to get your score higher?  ;)

Considering the fact that scoring works the same as in Reloaded; not really?

---

85 200/200
05 250/250
01 235/235
01 215/215
01 150/200

Interesting thread.

Sounds to me as if some folk are having difficulty forgiving the game for not being a straight copy of MSR with a new set of levels.

If you want new levels for Mutant Storm it would be wise to invest in a copy of the game for the PC and make use of the level editor and the ready-made levels that fans have produced, or just make your own and share them around.

 

 

---

You don't say.

 DROGTURIST wrote:

Well, the graphics alone let you know that this game had more hard work put into it. Does that make it better, though, or more worth the money? No, not really. The guys who do those shovelware Shrek games and whatnot are the hardest-working people in the industry (as they get insane deadlines, like 8 months to do a next-gen game). Doesn't mean we give them high review scores and the sales they really do deserve for putting in such hard work. That's not how the world works.

All I was drawing attention to was that I'm sure this game took a bit more effort to make.  I know that's not "how the world works" as you put it.

 DROGTURIST wrote:

I have zero clue what you're talking about here. You can't just say the game rewards skill when several skilled MSR players have already stated that they don't think so, not without posting some arguments or at least a clue to what your train of thought was here.

Well didn't you say the game was too hard?  Aren't you overwhelmed.  Some of you have said that said nobody can beat this game with one guy on Black Belt right ?  It's funny, because on one hand some of you tell us how hard the game is, and on the other you complain that it isn't skill worthy.  Make up your mind.

I'm sure several players find the game to be less "skillful".  I'm also sure they have an incredible bias that they can't overcome at least initially.  This is to be expected.  At least "one" top player has realized this and I think Snap Dragon (I think he used to be a killer Ikaruga player) is having his doubts jumping on board your tirade as well.

You have legitimate complaints and concerns.  All I'm saying is that I'm not buying into the "less skillful" argument yet, but that I concede the game is less intelligently drawn.

 DROGTURIST wrote:

Again, I really have no idea what you're talking about. There is no "enemy AI" to speak of at all. Most enemies follow a set pattern that they always follow. The rest follow you, which is very simplistic behaviour I find hard to call 'artificial intelligence.' I mean, even games from the 70's had enemies following you.

Geez ya think?  From the 70's?!  No kidding.  The enemy AI overwhelms the player.  Many "enemies" come at you in higher number and at a faster pace in smaller arenas than Mutant Storm reloaded on Black Belt.  The "system" I am referring to is going through "proper levels", not arenas, blasting baddies.  You can include everything else under "system":  game length, having a time limit with combos etc and perfecting where to get your points and where to sit and wait and where not to.  You were complaining earlier about not being able to be "original" to "tackle" the levels.  Or about not having many different ways for an arena to be completed.  THAT is now gone (says you).  How can you have no idea what I'm talking about?

 DROGTURIST wrote:

Considering the fact that scoring works the same as in Reloaded; not really?

You're just wrong.  Scoring does not work the same.  Here are a few examples: the multiplier goes down one level after getting hit.  That's one difference (which you also mentioned).  Here's another: You want to actually "spend time" completing levels and picking where you get the most maximum damage for the time spent.

 Crunchy RP wrote:

Interesting thread.

Sounds to me as if some folk are having difficulty forgiving the game for not being a straight copy of MSR with a new set of levels.

If you want new levels for Mutant Storm it would be wise to invest in a copy of the game for the PC and make use of the level editor and the ready-made levels that fans have produced, or just make your own and share them around.

 

 

Good point.  Don't they have like three 30+ level addons now?  Like 90 "new" levels heh

read a few of the comments & though i'd add one . i've played the heck out of msr when it first was released & it's still one of my favorites on the arcade. i haven't had a chance to play for more than five minutes on mse ( still haven't beaten the first world yet ) but from what i've seen so far i'm very happy with it. the achievements do look abit easier but it's not a big deal to me. so it gets the thumbs up from HoLy

---

i like 2 kill

I have 200/200 in MS:R, but have only played the demo for MS:E (kinda broke at the moment). The graphics were nice, co-op is very welcomed, I enjoyed the enemies, and the gameplay was enjoyable for the 10 minutes I played. The level design did seem a tad weak and the easy achievements sadden me. Also, only 16 levels is a disappointment. I would have been happy with 20 levels. Overall though I was impressed with the demo and will be enjoying the full game shortly.

 KitesAreFun wrote:

Well didn't you say the game was too hard?  Aren't you overwhelmed.  Some of you have said that said nobody can beat this game with one guy on Black Belt right ?

No, SnapDragon brought the word 'hard' into the equation. I just said unplayable, and I feel I've explained what I meant several times now.

 KitesAreFun wrote:

It's funny, because on one hand some of you tell us how hard the game is, and on the other you complain that it isn't skill worthy.  Make up your mind.

You do realize that there's good and poorly designed difficulty, right? To make up an exaggerated example to give you an idea of what I mean; imagine them filling room 1 in MSE with enemies covering every last square millimeter. You'd take a hit instantly when you spawn. It'd be hard and doable, but it'd be pretty damn crappy difficulty design.

As for examples of what I consider good difficulty, off the top of my head at 3:30am with a brain still recovering from the flu; smart AI (may or may not apply to this genre), cleverly placed obstacles, clever enemy patterns, tight and intricately weaved bullet patterns (meaning a set pattern, not just random shots that sometimes form an undodgable wave of bullets). While I can agree that MSE contains all of these to some degree, I feel that degree is too often too weak. It's only minorly clever and only minorly intricate most of the time.

 KitesAreFun wrote:

Geez ya think?  From the 70's?!  No kidding.  The enemy AI overwhelms the player.  Many "enemies" come at you in higher number and at a faster pace in smaller arenas than Mutant Storm reloaded on Black Belt.  The "system" I am referring to is going through "proper levels", not arenas, blasting baddies.  You can include everything else under "system":  game length, having a time limit with combos etc and perfecting where to get your points and where to sit and wait and where not to.  You were complaining earlier about not being able to be "original" to "tackle" the levels.  Or about not having many different ways for an arena to be completed.  THAT is now gone (says you).  How can you have no idea what I'm talking about?

Honestly, I'm not trying to be annoying, but I still don't have a single clue as to what you're trying to say.

 KitesAreFun wrote:

You're just wrong.  Scoring does not work the same.  Here are a few examples: the multiplier goes down one level after getting hit.  That's one difference (which you also mentioned).

Eh, that's a tweak in the rules. The mechanic is still exactly the same; die and you lose a bit of your multiplier. The exact number lost does not affect how the scoring system works at all.

The rest of the mechanics, strictly as far as scoring systems go, are still exactly the same. Shoot enemies to gain points. Shoot color-coded enemies in succession to earn a combo which builds your multiplier faster. Go full circle and have your multiplier make your shot enemies yield more points. Exact same system.

 KitesAreFun wrote:

Here's another: You want to actually "spend time" completing levels and picking where you get the most maximum damage for the time spent.

Again; I have no idea what this means.

---

85 200/200
05 250/250
01 235/235
01 215/215
01 150/200