gamingeek said:
Why do you think this is? Is it because of the genre's limitations? Is it because people are comparing them to other action games like FPS?
If so, how do other genres - like fighting games for instance - get dispensation and receive the scores to match the reviews?
SF IV 10/10s?
i think it is that, just as you said. the gameplay is considered comparable but limited by comparison so they mark the reviews down.
also, lightgun games despite being niche in a way, i guess are still considered casual and they get marks knocked off for that too.
fighting games on the other hand are considered a hardcore gamer's games. so they get marked up for their niche factor
___
Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu
I think Lightgun games will start to evolve as devs really start to experiment with them a little more. Look at the Umbrella Chronicles and Overkill. Those games offered more story to them than probably all the other lightgun games before them put together. And for all its flaws, Dragon Quest Swords (which was essentially a lightgun game with a sword) did a good job at offering a hub where you could speak with townspeople, upgrade weapons, train, play mini-games, etc.
So the genre has evolved but I think it's still about a generation behind where it could be. Extraction is another good step forward but because of all the bias against on-rail games is going to hurt it to the point where no one will play it.
It's interesting seeing how the three light gun games we've mentioned so far have changed from the old arcade concept. Simply by being a home console experience rather than an arcade game, that has changed things.
The games can last 12 hrs or more like Umbrella Chronicles, there are weapons upgrades level selects, shops and special features and far more story. Graphics have vastly improved.
I'm wondering what it would take to push a lightgun game into AAA territory, in review score terms. A 20 hr + game? Online co-op? DLC? First person melee with motionplus?
I think that there is a glass ceiling because when posting updates I saw a ton of reviews like this for Overkill:
" frankly amazing quality, attention to detail and largesse: the impeccable presentation and production values, the clever and generous structure, the compelling scoring, the intoxicating flow of the levels. Incredibly for such a simple and strictly limited game, it almost never tries your patience, and it's made with such infectious and irreverent glee and such obvious pride, you can't help but join in."
But they all ended in 8/10s.
Recently the same thing is happening with Dead Space Extraction reviews. Apart from Gamepro which gave it 5 stars, the reviews have been excellent but the scores dont breach 8/10 in general.
Kotaku review Dead Space Extraction "It's not just an on-rails game. It's an adventure as exciting as anything I've played in a while."
There also seems to be this battle between replayability and length.
I think reviewers expect replayability but those games that have that arcade like additiveness tend to be paced a lot differently than longer games which pad things out like Umbrella Chronicles and DS Extraction.
Is a 15 hour experience with slow pacing and great atmosphere - yet little replayability better than a 7 hour game that's endlessly replayable like the old style?
And how do you balance accuracy vs strategy. I was suprised when I started playing HOTD 2, 3 and overkill compared to RE UC as the cursor responsiveness was so much better. There is a lag in UC and I think its very deliberate to serve the slower pace.
Do you make the controls better and so accurate that the game becomes easier and thus peopel complain about difficulty? Or do you limit responsiveness to artificially make things harder?
gamingeek said:
I'm wondering what it would take to push a lightgun game into AAA territory, in review score terms. A 20 hr + game? Online co-op? DLC? First person melee with motionplus?
The ability to freely move around. 
Ravenprose said:gamingeek said:
I'm wondering what it would take to push a lightgun game into AAA territory, in review score terms. A 20 hr + game? Online co-op? DLC? First person melee with motionplus?
The ability to freely move around.
You've stolen Vaders line.
Ravenprose said:gamingeek said:
I'm wondering what it would take to push a lightgun game into AAA territory, in review score terms. A 20 hr + game? Online co-op? DLC? First person melee with motionplus?
The ability to freely move around.
End thread.
For a critic to treat it as something new they'll have to do something new, like a Grand Theft Auto Gaiden where everytime a chance to use your gun comes up they cut to first person and you use the wii-mote as a gun.
It is possible for played-out conventions to break the mold - look at Pacman CE and Space Invaders Extreme.
How about Killer 7?
That game is at the heart of it a light gun game. Your only really control over where you move is path changes, and back tracking. That's only one step further than most light gun games.
And that didn't really score much better, despite having reasonably complex gameplay (well sort of) and doing something interesting and different with the genre in terms of gameplay and presentation.
So if all you do is take a light-gun shooter's typical concept and go with that, I do think there is a ceiling there, as it's not going to be as substantial as other games without that limitation.
It doesn't mean it's a limitation on the actual concept though. You can expand beyond the traditional non-stop linear pathway and innovate. Done right, I'm sure you could see some AAA scores. As it is, there's not really the incentive there. Any developer with the ambition to do so isn't typically the one to be making a light-gun shooter.
---
Tell me to get back to rewriting this site so it's not horrible on mobileaspro said:GG - From a critical perspective I am sure that most light gun games are reviewed before they open the box. "Okay, light gun game. Does it function? If, so I'll give it a 7.5. Anything more I'll give it an 8."
For a critic to treat it as something new they'll have to do something new, like a Grand Theft Auto Gaiden where everytime a chance to use your gun comes up they cut to first person and you use the wii-mote as a gun.
That sounds like what Disaster Day of Crisis does. You move about in the third person freely and then when enemies pop up you take cover and pop out Gears of War style.
Foolz said:How about Killer 7?
That game is at the heart of it a light gun game. Your only really control over where you move is path changes, and back tracking. That's only one step further than most light gun games.
And that didn't really score much better, despite having reasonably complex gameplay (well sort of) and doing something interesting and different with the genre in terms of gameplay and presentation.
I was just thinking of this game before I clicked the thread title. I mean it was and wasn't on rails, you could go back and forward and change paths and go in different directions. I think it didn't score better because it was weird as ****, barely decipherable, cel-shaded and..... weird as **** 
What about an on rails game where you did have some movement, for instance you could move between cover points by pointing with IR and clicking a button to move to that cover point? Or hit a button to retreat to the previous point? Something like that.
There have been some pretty great lightgun games recentely and I was particularly impressed reading HOTD Overkill reviews. Most were quite enamoured with the game but then you only had a few reviews who would give the game a higher score than an 8/10.
I've noticed that most of the well known sites, they seem to have a glass ceiling when it comes to review scores and light gun games, they never seem to breach 8/10.
Why do you think this is? Is it because of the genre's limitations? Is it because people are comparing them to other action games like FPS?
If so, how do other genres - like fighting games for instance - get dispensation and receive the scores to match the reviews?
SF IV 10/10s?