Talk:Rail shooter

I've never heard of "rail shooter" being used to describe any shooter which you dont have direct control over the path of the character. Rather, I've only heard it used to describe a shooter where you can move the character to dodge but not explore around a world, AND the game isn't an overhead shooter (because people just call overhead shooters overhead shooters, never a subset of "rail shooters". So I've only seen the term used to describe games like "Starfox", and "Space Harrier".


 * I've only heard it used with the opposite meaning. A "rail shooter" is when your movement is fixed to a virtual rail, with the possible exception of very limited movement such as in Time Crisis.  84.92.137.39 09:07, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Starfox? I would call the pokemon game where you take pictures a rail game before I would call starfox. I normally think of a rail game as a turret style shooter. I guess (for lack of a better descriptor) GunCon games to just be lightgun games. I guess your on a rail and that make since but there the traditional limit on what you can do far exceeds that of a game where your the passenger in a car and shooting everything that tries to gun you down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.148.115.85 (talk) 09:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Where's Sin and Punishment?
The article says that Space Harrier is the seminal rail shooter, but, really, Sin and Punishment deserves that designation... or at the very least a mention.


 * Space Harrier was released in 1985, and Sin and Punishment was released in 2000. SaP is a GOOD shooter, while SH is SEMINAL. See? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.76.108.60 (talk) 21:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Light Gun Games should be it's own catagory
They are certainly unique enough to be their own catagory. And most importantly, not all light gun games would qualify as rail shooters. Both Starsky and Hutch and Resident Evil: Dead Aim are not rail shooters because the player controls the character's movement. Neither are Duck Hunt or Point Blank because you don't move in those games. User:Edward M January 16 2007


 * This is correct; I, too, think that Light Gun games, like House of the Dead or Time Crisis, are a seperate genre from Star Fox, Sin and Punishment, etc.. However, in gaming press the term "rail shooter" is every now and then used to describe both of these two types of games, sadly. Gaming press also is the only publicly appreciated authority on the matter, I reckon; hence this article's current situation. 83.167.112.5 25 08 2007  —The preceding  signed but undated.

The transition from 2D to 3D does not usually divide a genre
Are you sure that gaming press is consistent (or more often than not) refers to games in which the avatar is independently motile on the screen (as in Galaga, Raiden, Panzer Dragoon and other scrollers) as rail shooters? If these are not rail shooters, and I believe they are better described as scrolling shooters, then motion in a third dimension with an independently motile avatar is mechanically more similar to 2D scrollers than a fixed avatar in on a rail. For comparison, 2D platform games (Super Mario Bros) and 3D platform games (Super Mario Sunshine) are not mixed into divergent genres just because one version has a third dimension.

I'd suggest something like this:
 * 2D platformer: Super Mario Bros
 * 3D platformer: Super Mario Sunshine
 * 2D scroller: Raiden
 * 3D scroller: Panzer Dragoon
 * 3D rail: House of the Dead

--Ethan Kennerly 04:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * What we know for certain is that scrolling shooter games where you can dodge (Panzer Dragoon, Star Fox) and games where you can't (House of the Dead and, well, Rez) belong to different genres. But there is no set rule as to what exactly we should call a "rail shooter". Actually, yeah, Panzer Dragoon games are 3D scrollers, while HotD are light-gun shooters; but which of them are "rail shooter" games? Funny as it is, perhaps none, or maybe all.


 * But the fact is, game magazines and sites keep calling both these types of games "rail shooters" every now and then, and Wikipedia isn't the place for publishing personal opinions, so probably there is no helping this matter yet. Maybe, somebody should research into this controversy more and add to the article a short paragraph about his findings. Until a fine list of occasions of "rail shooter" mentions in on- and offline press is done, I believe this matter can't be helped. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.167.112.5 (talk) 23:18, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I propose we remove REZ from the list of traditional rail shooter games, because in REZ player isn't given the ability to actually dodge enemy attacks. I believe it belongs to a different genre than Star Fox or Sin and Punishment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.237.246.155 (talk) 11:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed House of the Dead, RE:UC and Time Crisis, because by this article's definitions a "traditional rail-shooter" game is where you can actually dodge enemy attacks, as opposed to light-gun shooters where you can only target and attack enemies and not dodge. Whoever cares to do a SEPERATE list for light-gun shooters, please do. Otherwise, the whole article needs to be discussed and rewritten - before piling Panzer Dragoon, Killer7 and House of the Dead together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.76.110.62 (talk) 13:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello! We do have such a list!  Please see List of light gun games.  Happy Christmas!  Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 15:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

proposed deletion
this article is horrendous; i can't believe its 'high' priority. i have tagged it for deletion. here is my reasoning: The central definition of the term, given in the article, does not make sense. its a 'sub-genre' that encompasses a broad range of genres? thats a contridiction, surely. The 'traditional rail shooter' section is completely incorrect imo (notice others have made similar comments here; at least it seems not to reflect consensus). those games are just shoot em' ups; there is already a better article to this effect. At the very least its all original research, OR that seems to me to be unverifiable (because its incorrect...). The light gun game section is not as bad, however there is already a superior article on light gun games (furthermore, not all light gun games are on rails). 'On rails' is usually used as an adjective to describe the movement in certain (most, really) light gun games. That is, the game controls the movement of your avatar, as if on a virtual rail (leaving you free to shoot). Of course, this can be dismissed as simply my opinion; but the burden of proof is on whoever is claiming that 'on rails shooter' is a sub-genre encompassing other genres etc... if the proposed deletion fails, i will still remove all dubious original research and take whatever is left to afd due to being redundant. Bridies (talk) 12:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * on reflection, the term is not as dubious as i initially thought. i still think its too subjective and not prevalent enough a term, though (in addition to the OR and presentation issues the article has). Bridies (talk) 13:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposals
Ok, proposed deletion of the article was over the top and in any case, the tag has been removed and a source provided. However I am not satisfied the issues are resolved. Furthermore, since there are comments here such as ‘the whole article needs to be discussed and rewritten’, ‘somebody should research into this controversy more’ as well as general disagreement and confusion, I had a look at the pages of games cited as examples here and the sources they cite (if any of these don't work, go to the article they came from):

Rez: http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3165700 describes the game as an ‘experimental on-rails music based shooter’. However, ‘on-rails’ is here used as an adjective to describe gameplay, not to define the genre (unless we need an article on ‘experimental on-rails music based shooter’ games?)

http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/848/848434p1.html calls it a ‘rail shooter at its core’

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/48901 also calls it a ‘rail shooter’

There are numerous sources that describe it simply as a ‘shooter’.

Star Fox is not classed in its wiki article as a ‘rail shooter’; likewise in the sources cited. Worth noting there’s some disagreement on this talk page about it.

http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/746/746646p2.html however notes ‘on-rails shooting gameplay’. Here, again, ‘on rails’ is an adjective used to describe gameplay, not a definition of genre.

Sin and punishment: http://uk.ign64.ign.com/articles/165/165248p1.html ‘Rail shooter (forward-facing, 2D feel)’ is under ‘features’; under ‘genre’ is ‘Third-Person Action’.

http://uk.gamespot.com/n64/action/sinandpunishmentsote/review.html interestingly, this review notes the space harrier and panzer influences. It terms the game a ‘shooter’; in the genre bit at the side, ‘action’ is given.

http://uk.gamespot.com/wii/action/sinandpunishmentsote/review.html review of wii version. Uses the term ‘arcade-style "rail" shooter’. Also says: ‘The easiest way to describe Sin and Punishment is to say that it's a rail shooter similar in spirit to Panzer Dragoon or Space Harrier’. ‘Action’ is again given as genre in the bit at the side.

Buck Rogers: no mention of genre in the (small) wiki section.

Space Harrier: though its wiki page terms is a ‘rail shooter’, all references term it a ‘shooter’ or ‘shoot ‘em up’.

Silpheed: is termed a shoot ‘em up on its wiki article, as do the (few) references.

Time Crisis: wiki article calls it a ‘rail shooter’; there are no references. Some sources from the usual suspects, I googled myself:

http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/836/836596p2.html the review has no mention of ‘rail shooter’ as a genre, only ‘on-rails’ to describe the movement. The genre is given as ‘light gun game’.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps3/timecrisis4 ‘light gun’ and ‘action’ given as genre.

The above talk about the 4th instalment which deviates (I think…) from the on-rails format a little, however.

This review mentions the series as a whole: http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=685 it’s a ‘light gun shooter series’.

Virtua Cop’s article calls it a ‘rail shooter’; again no references to support this (article has no references at all).

House of the dead 4: article calls it a ‘rail shooter’; cited source http://uk.gamespot.com/news/6153652.html calls it a ‘light gun shooter’.

I conclude from the above evidence that ‘on-rails’ is primarily a term used to describe movement in certain games. The article should be renamed to reflect this. These games include both (most) light gun games and certain shoot ‘em ups. The term is occasionally used as a (sub) genre definition applicable to the latter. The reason is that these games do not fit into sub-genres such as ‘scrolling shoot em ups’ (note: there is a discrepancy between this and the video game genres page. Said page has ‘shooter’ as the genre and ‘shoot ‘em ups’ as a sub-genre, as well as FPSs etc). It should be made clear that this is an occasionally used term and is not necessarily prevalent critical consensus. Light-gun games are not normally termed ‘rail shooters’ (as an alternative genre definition). There is a trend on wikipedia to categorise them as such but this runs counter to the evidence supplied and should be rectified. The tone of the light-gun section should be altered slightly to show it is about the development/history of ‘on-rails’ movement in these games; a link to the main article should be provided for info on the genre proper. Any thoughts? More sources could be useful although I’m reasonably confident these will reflect the trend. If there are no objections I’ll try and work in the above points? Bridies (talk) 00:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I also have objections to the source currently in the article (placed when the prod tag was removed). While it is (I assume, I’m not familiar with it) a respected publication, it is not primarily a gaming publication (unless I’m mistaken?) and thus it is not sufficient as the article’s only source (though more sources could be added, as would be necessary to demonstrate the terms prevalence). The review makes a point of explaining what a ‘light gun’ is and what ‘rail shooter’ (in terms of describing the movement; not necessarily the genre) is, showing it is not written for a remotely knowledgeable audience. It also echoes what is said in the wiki article. The review makes comparisons to games such as Rez and Panzer Dragoon as other rail shooters (here is the supporting evidence for ‘rail shooter’ as a prevalent genre distinction). Why does it do this? The games being reviewed are not similar to Rez and Panzer. The wiki article it is supporting makes a distinction between Rez (and Panzer etc) as ‘traditional’ rail shooters and light-gun games (such as the games being reviewed) as coming under an alternative view of the term/genre. To be blunt, the review reads as if it this wikipedia article on rail shooters is the extent of the writer’s research. Bridies (talk) 00:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * rewrote the lead section and forgot to provide edit summary... it's much the same content wise but is now clearer, more comprehensive and referenced. Bridies (talk) 18:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Light gun shooters
I moved the information on light gun games to a seperate article, light gun shooter. 'Light gun shooter' is a more prevalent term than 'rail shooter', as applicable to light gun games; seperating them from games like space harrier etc, is also less confusing. Light gun games should also be removed from the list section, as there is already a list of light gun games. Bridies (talk) 14:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars
According to this list, it's a rail shooter, and is also from 1983, which predates Space Harrier. The references all seem to be "Top ###" lists, though so a reference to it actually being a rail shooter would probably be needed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_considered_the_best 172.56.209.60 (talk) 18:42, 1 July 2024 (UTC)