thread

Dispute: Marc Cohen - Atari 2600 / VCS - Slot Machine - NTSC - Game 1, Difficulty B - Player: Todd Rogers - Score: 9,999

User Tag List

Is this a valid dispute?

You may not vote on this poll
    You have no permission to view/vote this poll.
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 48
  1. VERIFIED COMMISSIONER Credibility: 8,000
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Leigh-On-Sea, UK
    Posts
    225
    Thanks (Received)
    247
    Likes (Received)
    427
    Blog Entries
    10
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Follows
    17
    Following
    6
    Is this potentially another one where the rules were written after the score was achieved?
  2. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 1,003
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    118
    Thanks (Received)
    37
    Likes (Received)
    92
    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Follows
    3
    Following
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Hawksett View Post
    Is this potentially another one where the rules were written after the score was achieved?
    slotmachine leaderboard.PNG

    What rules?

    To me this just looks like a garbage track that nobody was around to discuss/debate the rules for. I would think Todd added it himself, but I don't really know how it all works. Can someone fill me in on the procedure for adding new tracks? Historically and currently
    Thanks jjt_defender thanked this post
    Likes d3scride, jjt_defender liked this post
  3. VERIFIED COMMISSIONER Credibility: 8,000
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Leigh-On-Sea, UK
    Posts
    225
    Thanks (Received)
    247
    Likes (Received)
    427
    Blog Entries
    10
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Follows
    17
    Following
    6
    'Rule' then :)
    This is why I asked. 'Default Settings' is most unsatisfying and sounds like it was added as a 'default' thing in itself if the methods used originally were unknown.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mapler90210 View Post
    slotmachine leaderboard.PNG

    What rules?

    To me this just looks like a garbage track that nobody was around to discuss/debate the rules for. I would think Todd added it himself, but I don't really know how it all works. Can someone fill me in on the procedure for adding new tracks? Historically and currently
  4. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 14,111
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    4,725
    Thanks (Received)
    2043
    Likes (Received)
    3677
    Blog Entries
    52
    Live Streaming Channel(s)
    View Channel: marcamy_1029
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    28 Thread(s)
    Follows
    49
    Following
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Hawksett View Post
    Is this potentially another one where the rules were written after the score was achieved?
    It is possible. Unfortunately, you will see a lot of these "default settings" labeled across the Atari 2600 platform, without actually analyzing the game details itself.

    In the past, I have requested for Atari refs to create new tracks and game derivatives with simple rules, (sometimes with small details when necessary) and they usually complied with this. For amending existing rules that were broken or non-detailed, that task was usually done by a head referee. Of course, before my time (pre-2006), I cannot confirm who created what nor how.

    @RTM might be able to give you more insight.
    Thanks Dave Hawksett, jjt_defender thanked this post
    Likes jjt_defender liked this post
  5. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 14,111
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    4,725
    Thanks (Received)
    2043
    Likes (Received)
    3677
    Blog Entries
    52
    Live Streaming Channel(s)
    View Channel: marcamy_1029
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    28 Thread(s)
    Follows
    49
    Following
    32
    Want a 9999 max-out? Want to win REAL $$$???

    Learn the codes!!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43X2GLM6R2U
    Thanks jjt_defender thanked this post
    Likes jjt_defender liked this post
  6. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 14,111
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    4,725
    Thanks (Received)
    2043
    Likes (Received)
    3677
    Blog Entries
    52
    Live Streaming Channel(s)
    View Channel: marcamy_1029
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    28 Thread(s)
    Follows
    49
    Following
    32
    reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset reset x9999 resets afterwards = A very possible 9999 !!!!

    When you or the CPU go bankrupt, game is over, no continues allowed.

    IS THIS A LEGIT practice and method, under a "default rule sets?
    IF YES, does this mean that everyone who submits scores to TG (past, present, future) are allowed to continue their games?
    Thanks jjt_defender thanked this post
    Likes francoisadt, jjt_defender liked this post
  7. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 1,003
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    118
    Thanks (Received)
    37
    Likes (Received)
    92
    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Follows
    3
    Following
    4
    Is it possible that this track should just be archived due to not being defined well enough for any additional competitors to compete?

    Imagine somebody new tries to submit a score to this track, and for discussion's sake let's say Todd's score is real, but we don't know how he achieved it. The adjudicating body for the new score then has to decide the exact moment that a score attempt for this game ends. From here, two things could happen:

    1) The adjudicating decides that a score attempt ends when either the player or computer runs out of tokens. The new score is accepted, but we now have no idea if Todd's run is comparable or if he had an unfair advantage compared to the new player.

    2) The adjudicating body decides that the score attempt ends only when the player runs out of tokens, or simply chooses to end the game. The new score is accepted, but we now have no idea if we've screwed Todd over by giving another player an unfair advantage (maybe he knows something about how the RNG works that allows him to achieve what we view as extremely unlikely).

    Neither of these cases are the end of the world, but I personally think they're ****ty situations nonetheless.

    Also neither of these cases address the fact that there are three different ways to read the player's score in this game, and the rules don't say which one to use:

    1) Read the score when the game ends (game ends only when player runs out of tokens): This may seem silly, as this score will always be 0, but it's also the most standard timing to end the game: when the PLAYER reaches a game over. The fact that this is clearly not the right way to read the score is what convinces me that any track for this game is nonsense without a clear definition.

    2) Read the score when the game ends (game ends when either the player or computer runs out of tokens): This option allows for a non-zero score, and also when at the first time that the game itself will stop play for a game over. It's a little awkward because it isn't the PLAYER's game over, but it's also clearly a game over.

    3) Read the player's highest score in a session: It seems likely (but we don't know for sure) that this is how Todd's score would be achieved. This is also vastly different from how games are normally scored however, and I can't personally wrap my head around "default rules" allowing you to apply this approach.

    I mentioned it previously, but I think this is a bad track. We have no idea how the score was achieved, and the lack of clarity discourages submissions from being made and accepted, because it puts either Todd's score or the new score in a position where we can't be certain it belongs on the track.
    Thanks jjt_defender thanked this post
    Likes jjt_defender liked this post
  8. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 1,003
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    118
    Thanks (Received)
    37
    Likes (Received)
    92
    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Follows
    3
    Following
    4
    Actually there's a 4th option: Require the player to stop manually and read that score. Not sure how enforceable that would be however.
  9. VERIFIED Legendary Member Credibility: 2,568
    Join Date
    Jan 1998
    Posts
    2,773
    Thanks (Received)
    780
    Likes (Received)
    1552
    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Follows
    38
    Following
    12
    I'm of the opinion that this entire title and all scores contained within should be stricken from the TG database for no other reason than the "strategy" of the game largely amounts to dumb luck and randomization.

    This is not a true video GAME...it is gambling. Not for money, but for the fun of it. Any video poker, slot machine, etc type record should be summarily removed from the database. Just not worth tracking, period.

    And that's on top of the fact that "9,999" is like hitting the Powerball.

    Dump it...STAT !!
    Thanks jjt_defender, GibGirl thanked this post
    Likes jjt_defender, GibGirl, D.B. Cooper liked this post
  10. VERIFIED Senior Member Credibility: 14,111
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    4,725
    Thanks (Received)
    2043
    Likes (Received)
    3677
    Blog Entries
    52
    Live Streaming Channel(s)
    View Channel: marcamy_1029
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    28 Thread(s)
    Follows
    49
    Following
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by RTM View Post
    I'm of the opinion that this entire title and all scores contained within should be stricken from the TG database for no other reason than the "strategy" of the game largely amounts to dumb luck and randomization.

    This is not a true video GAME...it is gambling. Not for money, but for the fun of it. Any video poker, slot machine, etc type record should be summarily removed from the database. Just not worth tracking, period.

    And that's on top of the fact that "9,999" is like hitting the Powerball.

    Dump it...STAT !!
    You are entitled to your opinion of what should or should not be in the database. We all do!!!

    Now you dont have to like the game, and you may call it a waste of time (I agree, it is), but if the cart goes into an Atari 2600, and you can play it, then it IS a true video game.

    Las Vegas saying: IF you can put real $ into it, and its possible real $ can come out as a result, (gain or loss) it IS GAMBLING!!!
    (I am modifying my Atari 2600 as we speak for the fun of it, to accept and spit out coins) ;)
    Thanks jjt_defender thanked this post
    Likes jjt_defender liked this post
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Join us