JJT_Defender's Feed

Most legacy scores were the culmination of both player's full games. There was a movement towards the game ending at the first player's game over around a decade ago. Those tracks which end at the first player death should already have rules which specifically indicate as such.

JJT_Defender thanked this post

Snowflake, JJT_Defender liked this post

Originally Posted by Barthax

Most legacy scores were the culmination of both player's full games. There was a movement towards the game ending at the first player's game over around a decade ago. Those tracks which end at the first player death should already have rules which specifically indicate as such.

thanks barthax, i've seen differing views on this and couldnt quite be 100% sure of the history. I know juan is asking the question cause of one current adjudication in particular which thankfully makes the question moot as it expliclty allows for the sum of both players until game is over. i've certainly seen ones that explicilty say otherwise. the default/global though i was led to believe for quite some time ended with the first player to lose but then i saw others. to be clear, i believe you, but is there any documentation to prove this?

JJT_Defender thanked this post

JJT_Defender liked this post

Originally Posted by Snowflake

thanks barthax, i've seen differing views on this and couldnt quite be 100% sure of the history. I know juan is asking the question cause of one current adjudication in particular which thankfully makes the question moot as it expliclty allows for the sum of both players until game is over. i've certainly seen ones that explicilty say otherwise. the default/global though i was led to believe for quite some time ended with the first player to lose but then i saw others. to be clear, i believe you, but is there any documentation to prove this?

I haven't searched but I know Robert Mruczek often wrote articles on the two-player arcade performances because they were so unusual. There will probably be several forum threads to dig into: from memory (because I was interested in the game at the time) I'm pretty sure there's one on the then-Wizard of Wor two-player record.

JJT_Defender thanked this post

JJT_Defender liked this post

WoW explictly states "The record is the sum of the 2 scores upon game completion. ": https://www.twingalaxies.com/game/wizard-of-wor/arcade/points-2-player-team-3-lives/page/1?ref=fbshare - I'm pretty sure that rule wasn't there originally & was added during the "it's not 2 player if there's only one person remaining" controversy to ensure a level playing field.

Snowflake thanked this post

Thank you Barthax and snowflake

ironically i remember reading the wow one. make me now wonder if that one is just a huge deal or if we just happen to remember the same thing

JJT_Defender thanked this post

Barthax, JJT_Defender liked this post

i'll try to find it, but i think i stumbled on it in looking up old potential score challenges from before the dispute system. i believe rtm specifically brought that one up as one that shouldnt be challenged despite it seeming like it should because he witnessed it and even though one player (if i recalll father/son team) kept going after the ohter and it was legit at the time. i believe the same thread made a point that it APPEARS that david nelson beat a max on some mame game but as that was also witnessed its presumably like atari night driver where the extra point is just somehting noone else has figured out yet.

JJT_Defender thanked this post

Barthax, JJT_Defender liked this post

Originally Posted by Snowflake

i'll try to find it, but i think i stumbled on it in looking up old potential score challenges from before the dispute system. i believe rtm specifically brought that one up as one that shouldnt be challenged despite it seeming like it should because he witnessed it and even though one player (if i recalll father/son team) kept going after the ohter and it was legit at the time. i believe the same thread made a point that it APPEARS that david nelson beat a max on some mame game but as that was also witnessed its presumably like atari night driver where the extra point is just somehting noone else has figured out yet.

Yeah, the father/son does ring a very good bell. It was a period in TG history where rules could be re-written (as you well know), so if you can find it & put a date on it, legacy scores prior to that time are likely to be game completion and not first player death.

JJT_Defender thanked this post

Snowflake, JJT_Defender liked this post

heres something talking about it. we get the date from 2002 and the names. we dont hear it explicilty stated but pretty darn close

Originally Posted by RTM

Hello all:

As far as I can remember, in their doubles game, John kept his section of the game going from somewhere around the 500K mark to his portion of the 1.3M score. I think he nearly achieved a world record in that leg of his gameplay all by itself, but of course we can't compare that to the singles score.

Robert

that statement wouldnt make much sense otherwise. also this is discussing 2 years after the fact, but its a start https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/111024-Wizard-of-Wor/page2

JJT_Defender thanked this post

JJT_Defender liked this post

The reason there was discussion about 10+ years ago was because you would get a situation where ONE total expert would team up with someone hopeless but they could still win. In other words, not really a TEAM effort because the expert carried the novice.

john

.

as recent as 2006 there was talk about adding such a rule which implies of coures the rule didnt exist yet. granted to be fair all it really proves is that participatns of the conversation didnt know/believe the rule existed yet, but as its a tg knowledgable active group at the time that counts for something

https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/115092-2-Players-records/page2

not exactly relevant but really cool find in the process. twin galaxies first 22 games ever (wow among them and how i find the thread). so while this does nothing to answer the questions here, its such a cool read i wanted to share it https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/122084-The-original-22-arcade-games-at-Twin-Galaxies?p=659510#post659510

JJT_Defender thanked this post

Barthax, JJT_Defender liked this post

Final team scores stop when one player dies, no further scoring can be added to the final score.

Originally Posted by Hal1973

Final team scores stop when one player dies, no further scoring can be added to the final score.

is that your opinion on what things should be, or are you saying that rule exists somewhere and if so can you link it?

comment 169

https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/139235-I-don-t-get-it/page17

this is when jace owned tg but people couldnt submit yet and there was a bunch of discussion of how things should be. again its people remembering which is always open to problems but on the flip side the only argument for this rule is also memory so if we're gonna use memory in 2020 for what the rule should be and when it started it seems just as fair to use memories from longer ago

JJT_Defender thanked this post

Barthax, JJT_Defender liked this post

also not immedaitley relevant but useful that as recnet as 2006 you could play on harder settings than required. we already knew this, but this seems like proof. wasnt blaine the chief ref at the time? if so we finally have an official post proving peoles memory right on that https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/118516-Variation-TGTS-Tournament

JJT_Defender thanked this post

JJT_Defender liked this post

Originally Posted by lexmark

The reason there was discussion about 10+ years ago was because you would get a situation where ONE total expert would team up with someone hopeless but they could still win. In other words, not really a TEAM effort because the expert carried the novice.

It is still a team, no matter how little one player contibutes to the score. If the expert wants to team up with a noob and carry them, that's absolutely their choice. Or are we going to dictate who a player teams up with?

D.B. Cooper, Barthax liked this post

JJT says: In 2 player team sports competition like tennis, golf,bowling,billards etc. if a player is out due to injury, quits or falls ill, it is a forfeit. You need the 2nd player to continue, or their is no team competition, then just a individual.

-------------------------------------------------

These examples do not apply to videogames. In real life sports the games almost always end when the time expires or when you score certain number of points or you complete the course, it is very rare that a team retires due to injury.

In videogames specially arcades, the most common thing is that the game ends because the player dies, this is the logical process and shouldn't be seen as an extreme case and therefore stop the whole game.

Besides you left out examples in where a team can continue without other members like in racing, if one of the members of the team falls behind or his car is wrecked, the other racer is not forced to quit.

The argument that I hear constantnly is that an expert player is going to team up with just anybody and destroy practically singlehanded all other teams that have been practicing together, etc.

To this I say, if a player is so good that he can beat the efforts of two others, he deserves to be the winner no matter in what team he is, and the two not-so-good players should go cry in private.

Snowflake, D.B. Cooper, Barthax liked this post