For the people that are saying Vampire Survivors is just a roguelike, I think there's some key differences from the genre that got copied in other games that make VS become its own genre: -There's no level design, the arena is just a blank canvas to put enemies in. -The gameplay is often more automatic, with more focus being put on dodging attacks than aiming your own. -The progression is purely arcade-like. You don't progress from level to level, and the end is based purely on time spent playing rather than beating a final boss. -Levelling up is integral to the game's mechanics, when most modern roguelites don't have levelling at all. There are some similarities, but I feel like the bigger arcade-ish elements to VS make it different enough from roguelikes to be called its own genre. Also, I've seen a depressing amount of people saying "Vampire Survivors is just *insert game from the past*" but the game they're talking about NEVER resemble VS in any way other than being a top-down game with shooting.
i wouldn't say there's any malice in this type of design but it is poison for the brain imo. instead of the fun being derived from meaningful choices, it's fun adquired by seeing the number go up and seeing the pretty colors, you said it yourself, it's just like gambling. you can do a lot with simple movement controls without needing to add anything else, just look at how deep bullet hell games get with relatively simple controls.
Yeah I think it's only when the design is used intentionally to exploit you in some way that's more than just really enjoying a game. Bullet heaven games are so unique just because their movement is basic as hell but they've got so much stimulation that yeah, as you say, makes it fun watching a number going up. It's kind of like why we enjoy games like Cookie Clicker and Clicker Heroes.
I take some issue with the gambling aspect being brushed aside "because it doesn't exploit people monetarily". It feels like a neoliberal moral escape, were money is the only important moral compass. Addiction is also bad because it tends to reduce people to obsessed zombies, the fact that then certain actors exploit them for gains it's bad but is an added point to the evil of turning people's brain to mush. In fact the cash transaction that take place is not different than any other transaction we have in our world, it's just that one party cannot act rationally anymore. Like if slot machine sin vegas were free I would not like them anyway for how they destroy people. So we should be wary of the dopamine race to the bottom that videogames are slowly engaging in, even if it is sometimes done without malicious money gains in mind
I know exactly what you mean. It’s so easy to say ‘if it’s free you’ve got nothing to lose’ but addiction can be really harmful even if you’re not losing money. I think games often tread the line really well, it’s not as if people are becoming addicted to vampire survivors to the point where they are becoming obsessed zombies. The gambling aspects just make the game more fun rather than more dangerous
I think it's very fair to hone in on gambling as a central part of the genre. But I don't think that's *inherently* evil. People I talked to (and I myself) have played VS *specifically* because indulging a bit in all that evil stuff, safely, is still real dopamine. But it definitely needs, like, awareness and a little bit of monitoring.
100% I'd agree. It's only really dodgarama when there's a real issue with it, which often comes down to if you're either betting money, or winning money.
Yeah I think it’s too long of a game to work in an arcade now, and it’s too easy to win. If it was a lot harder and survive as long as you can it’d pop off as an arcade version
Great video, you summarized why I love this new genre of games, and why Im always looking for new ones, its like the whole improvements of a normal genre is getting hyper accelerated here, and Im all for it
I love roguelites, VS was definitely a happy surprise when it released, especially with the current landscape of the gaming industry. For me VS is 3rd favourite, 2nd is SYNTHETIK, and my number uno is Slay the Spire. But when a game like VS comes around and innovates a new sub genre, it's a wave of attention to the game and honestly, it's well deserved and I'm happy for the dev of VS for all his success. Again great video! It's always great to see people researching and documenting gaming history.
I’d say auto-shooters are at the very least their own sub-genre. I’ve only caught the auto-shooter bug very recently playing the DRG Survivors Demo (which is a very generous demo btw… played it for like 6 hours). I more agree than disagree that these games *feel* different enough to be their own thing.
Been meaning to check out that demo actually, you've got me hooked on backpack battles though 😅... I think there's no real reason not to distinguish these games. It's just easier to then find games by genre
@@progress_gamesdude backpack battles is so good it’s insane. I’m really excited to see how it develops. And yeah, I don’t see a reason to not distinguish them either.
I’m confused by the rest of the comments here which are saying that Bullet Heaven isn’t a genre - sure it’s not the largest one, but I’d definitely call it a sub genre of Rogue-lite. It is so interesting to see gambling psychology being unleashed on video games, especially ones that a younger audience in their formative years have access to
I think in this genre we see gambling techniques being used fairly which we don’t often see which is why it’s so interesting. I know in my next game, although it won’t be Bullet heaven, it’ll take inspiration from their use of gambling techniques
I think this is whole horde shooter genre started way back, like I remember playing the first Crimsonland which was basically the same thing, you run around, kill enemies, get random upgrades, survive as long you can, or till timer runs out. If we go waaay back, I think a real beginning is Smash TV for snes. There are some small differences, but even within this "new genre" you have those outliers too, like lack of autofire (20 mins til dawn), and so on. So I wouldnt call it a new genre, more like a resurrection, renewed interest, in an older one, or even, just what I really think it is most of the time, survivors clones.
Spent awhile on dopamine receptors and gambling when those are aspects on nearly ever game. Didn't seem to focus on the primary topic, or reinforce a thesis.
What makes Bullet heavens so notable is that they oftentimes require and arguably rely on really strong gambling aspects and major innovation unlike other genres
Yep I’d agree. However the genre we have now is a modernised version, much 1980s rogue compared to roguelikes of today. There’s certainly a lot of inspiration but there’s also a lot of innovation
@@progress_games I'm just glad I'm not alone in thinking that Crimsonland was influential here ^_^ Not to be dismissive, but I mostly just see this as an Idle Crimsonland; much like "open world" is not a genre, it's a feature, I see this as basically "idling flat plane horde (features) shooter (genre)" with "loop compulsion" (loop compulsion is not unique to ROGUElites, that's just most people's contemporary touchstone). I get why people slapped ROGUE terms on it but... yeah... Oh, oh, and uh, bugbear alert; genre hair splitting with ROGUElike/ROGUElite lead me to embracing, against my preference, Traditional ROGUElike, just so I didn't have to disambiguate lite/like to people who don't care about the differences ^_^; However, as a pedant, I will relent and concede that in things like this, you're right, the genre is a bit more modernised. I just never knew what genre Crimsonland... was supposed to be? 'Birds-eye Shooter' feels... weird now to suggest. "Idling Birds-eye Shooter" isn't catchy, but... that's what I see...
I think that's fair to say. I haven't played Crimsonland but it does look pretty similar. I would still argue this is the one of the newest game genre, because although it may've been inspired by an older title, it's been given new life recently. Kind of like how I'd say a roguelite is a relatively new genre even when they're derivatives of a game from 1980.
@@progress_games Yeah... I completely agree, at the very least on the notion that VS revitalised genre that Crimsonland created. It just been a pet-peeve of sorts. As I LOVE crimsonland, and dislike the way VS can be played on Atari's joystick. Half of the fun of having a gun is shooting it, and VS robs you of that.
I think roguelike is a really broad title. Like you have games like StS and Dead Cells and they're the same genre just because you permanently die? I think it's fair enough to say these new games are roguelikes and bullet heaven
Good video - I feel if you condense you script it will feel beater to watch - I understand the watch hour issue but I tended to skip in your video - maybe the examples of the games did not need so much explanation
Noted. I think the problem I faced was the audience I was catering to. For the general public the examples might've been quite helpful, but if you're familiar with the genre then it could be a bit repetitive.
For the people that are saying Vampire Survivors is just a roguelike, I think there's some key differences from the genre that got copied in other games that make VS become its own genre:
-There's no level design, the arena is just a blank canvas to put enemies in.
-The gameplay is often more automatic, with more focus being put on dodging attacks than aiming your own.
-The progression is purely arcade-like. You don't progress from level to level, and the end is based purely on time spent playing rather than beating a final boss.
-Levelling up is integral to the game's mechanics, when most modern roguelites don't have levelling at all.
There are some similarities, but I feel like the bigger arcade-ish elements to VS make it different enough from roguelikes to be called its own genre.
Also, I've seen a depressing amount of people saying "Vampire Survivors is just *insert game from the past*" but the game they're talking about NEVER resemble VS in any way other than being a top-down game with shooting.
100%. There's enough of them and they're certainly unique enough to the point where it's worth adopting a new term.
i wouldn't say there's any malice in this type of design but it is poison for the brain imo.
instead of the fun being derived from meaningful choices, it's fun adquired by seeing the number go up and seeing the pretty colors, you said it yourself, it's just like gambling.
you can do a lot with simple movement controls without needing to add anything else, just look at how deep bullet hell games get with relatively simple controls.
Yeah I think it's only when the design is used intentionally to exploit you in some way that's more than just really enjoying a game.
Bullet heaven games are so unique just because their movement is basic as hell but they've got so much stimulation that yeah, as you say, makes it fun watching a number going up. It's kind of like why we enjoy games like Cookie Clicker and Clicker Heroes.
I take some issue with the gambling aspect being brushed aside "because it doesn't exploit people monetarily". It feels like a neoliberal moral escape, were money is the only important moral compass. Addiction is also bad because it tends to reduce people to obsessed zombies, the fact that then certain actors exploit them for gains it's bad but is an added point to the evil of turning people's brain to mush. In fact the cash transaction that take place is not different than any other transaction we have in our world, it's just that one party cannot act rationally anymore. Like if slot machine sin vegas were free I would not like them anyway for how they destroy people. So we should be wary of the dopamine race to the bottom that videogames are slowly engaging in, even if it is sometimes done without malicious money gains in mind
I know exactly what you mean. It’s so easy to say ‘if it’s free you’ve got nothing to lose’ but addiction can be really harmful even if you’re not losing money. I think games often tread the line really well, it’s not as if people are becoming addicted to vampire survivors to the point where they are becoming obsessed zombies. The gambling aspects just make the game more fun rather than more dangerous
I think it's very fair to hone in on gambling as a central part of the genre. But I don't think that's *inherently* evil. People I talked to (and I myself) have played VS *specifically* because indulging a bit in all that evil stuff, safely, is still real dopamine. But it definitely needs, like, awareness and a little bit of monitoring.
100% I'd agree. It's only really dodgarama when there's a real issue with it, which often comes down to if you're either betting money, or winning money.
Wow those transitions are fire! That 'gambling' one really had me on the floor laughing you know. I guess you just had to be there
The fact that I know who this is even though your name is a random string of letters
I'm sad there is no arcade version of VS. I made a killing back in the day with Robotron
Yeah I think it’s too long of a game to work in an arcade now, and it’s too easy to win. If it was a lot harder and survive as long as you can it’d pop off as an arcade version
Great video, you summarized why I love this new genre of games, and why Im always looking for new ones, its like the whole improvements of a normal genre is getting hyper accelerated here, and Im all for it
Glad you liked the video! Yeah this genre is like fine tuned to be as dopamine inducing and addictive as possible and I love it!
I love roguelites, VS was definitely a happy surprise when it released, especially with the current landscape of the gaming industry. For me VS is 3rd favourite, 2nd is SYNTHETIK, and my number uno is Slay the Spire. But when a game like VS comes around and innovates a new sub genre, it's a wave of attention to the game and honestly, it's well deserved and I'm happy for the dev of VS for all his success. Again great video! It's always great to see people researching and documenting gaming history.
7:23 had a chuckle at that ngl
I'd say these games already fit a genre, rogue-lite.
I'd agree they're already a roguelite. But at the same time, games can have more than one genre...
I’d say auto-shooters are at the very least their own sub-genre. I’ve only caught the auto-shooter bug very recently playing the DRG Survivors Demo (which is a very generous demo btw… played it for like 6 hours). I more agree than disagree that these games *feel* different enough to be their own thing.
Been meaning to check out that demo actually, you've got me hooked on backpack battles though 😅... I think there's no real reason not to distinguish these games. It's just easier to then find games by genre
@@progress_gamesdude backpack battles is so good it’s insane. I’m really excited to see how it develops. And yeah, I don’t see a reason to not distinguish them either.
I’m confused by the rest of the comments here which are saying that Bullet Heaven isn’t a genre - sure it’s not the largest one, but I’d definitely call it a sub genre of Rogue-lite. It is so interesting to see gambling psychology being unleashed on video games, especially ones that a younger audience in their formative years have access to
I think in this genre we see gambling techniques being used fairly which we don’t often see which is why it’s so interesting. I know in my next game, although it won’t be Bullet heaven, it’ll take inspiration from their use of gambling techniques
@@progress_games foreshadowing 👀
I think this is whole horde shooter genre started way back, like I remember playing the first Crimsonland which was basically the same thing, you run around, kill enemies, get random upgrades, survive as long you can, or till timer runs out. If we go waaay back, I think a real beginning is Smash TV for snes.
There are some small differences, but even within this "new genre" you have those outliers too, like lack of autofire (20 mins til dawn), and so on.
So I wouldnt call it a new genre, more like a resurrection, renewed interest, in an older one, or even, just what I really think it is most of the time, survivors clones.
Spent awhile on dopamine receptors and gambling when those are aspects on nearly ever game. Didn't seem to focus on the primary topic, or reinforce a thesis.
What makes Bullet heavens so notable is that they oftentimes require and arguably rely on really strong gambling aspects and major innovation unlike other genres
@progress_games i realized after i commented i didn't say anything positive, honestly good job on the video.
@@Lyoishi Lmao all good, I appreciate the honesty
But, Crimsonland was a thing for a long time, free before it was made into a shooter... Isn't that the grandfather of this new distinction?
Yep I’d agree. However the genre we have now is a modernised version, much 1980s rogue compared to roguelikes of today. There’s certainly a lot of inspiration but there’s also a lot of innovation
@@progress_games I'm just glad I'm not alone in thinking that Crimsonland was influential here ^_^ Not to be dismissive, but I mostly just see this as an Idle Crimsonland; much like "open world" is not a genre, it's a feature, I see this as basically "idling flat plane horde (features) shooter (genre)" with "loop compulsion" (loop compulsion is not unique to ROGUElites, that's just most people's contemporary touchstone). I get why people slapped ROGUE terms on it but... yeah...
Oh, oh, and uh, bugbear alert; genre hair splitting with ROGUElike/ROGUElite lead me to embracing, against my preference, Traditional ROGUElike, just so I didn't have to disambiguate lite/like to people who don't care about the differences ^_^;
However, as a pedant, I will relent and concede that in things like this, you're right, the genre is a bit more modernised. I just never knew what genre Crimsonland... was supposed to be? 'Birds-eye Shooter' feels... weird now to suggest. "Idling Birds-eye Shooter" isn't catchy, but... that's what I see...
I am sorry, I will have to hardly disagree on this being a new genre, with all due respect to VS, It is just Crimsonland with map exploration.
I think that's fair to say. I haven't played Crimsonland but it does look pretty similar. I would still argue this is the one of the newest game genre, because although it may've been inspired by an older title, it's been given new life recently.
Kind of like how I'd say a roguelite is a relatively new genre even when they're derivatives of a game from 1980.
@@progress_games Yeah... I completely agree, at the very least on the notion that VS revitalised genre that Crimsonland created. It just been a pet-peeve of sorts. As I LOVE crimsonland, and dislike the way VS can be played on Atari's joystick. Half of the fun of having a gun is shooting it, and VS robs you of that.
@@ZandorDaysev You might like 20 minutes til dawn then... either way, thanks for watching and commenting!
I LOVE GAMBLING.
Thanks nice video!
gambling my beloved 🙏🙏
4:20 players simply beating off hords of enemies you say?
Dw it’s consensual 😁😁
Overall this is a good video, but calling it "bullet heaven" is painful as someone who actually knows what that means.
Thats just a rougelike/lite and it's every goddamn game on the app store now
I think roguelike is a really broad title. Like you have games like StS and Dead Cells and they're the same genre just because you permanently die? I think it's fair enough to say these new games are roguelikes and bullet heaven
Good video - I feel if you condense you script it will feel beater to watch - I understand the watch hour issue but I tended to skip in your video - maybe the examples of the games did not need so much explanation
Noted. I think the problem I faced was the audience I was catering to. For the general public the examples might've been quite helpful, but if you're familiar with the genre then it could be a bit repetitive.
Promo_SM