John73's Feed

Let me just add to this - and hopefully someone with Dreamcast experience can anwer...

While watching several of Daniel's Dreamcast scores - I see this image during the capture:

Is this normal for Dreamcast? Because I watched almost all of John Brissie's submissions where he showed the original disc, the console including the underside, the boot of the device etc - and I don't ever recall seeing in one of his submissions this screen.

Is there something I don't know about the Dreamcast - can you "turn off" this screen on an original console? Seems odd if you can.

Hi John, it seems to me you don't know enough about adjudicaton and this is yet another one of your hissy fits, all I can say is: My submission is valid and if you want to learn more about the Dreamcast, direct capture and acceptable packages of evidence I would gladly help you, but if you are going to start by saying that this is a failure of adjudication, a no-brainer, etc, you can just go ahead and be crazy while I keep submitting my achievments.

datagod liked this post

Originally Posted by John73

Let me just add to this - and hopefully someone with Dreamcast experience can anwer...

While watching several of Daniel's Dreamcast scores - I see this image during the capture:

Is this normal for Dreamcast?

Yes, that is the main menu.

Originally Posted by John73

Because I watched almost all of John Brissie's submissions where he showed the original disc, the console including the underside, the boot of the device etc - and I don't ever recall seeing in one of his submissions this screen.

You access to this screen by turning on the console with the lid open.

Originally Posted by John73

Is there something I don't know about the Dreamcast?

If you don't own or have ever played one, yes, there is lots and lots of stuff you don't know about this console.

Originally Posted by John73

can you "turn off" this screen on an original console? Seems odd if you can.

Mine is an original console and the only way to turn it off is by startng the console with a disc inside and have the option of auto-start, you wont see the menu but the dreamcast logo and then the game starts, if you turn on the dreamcast without a disc, or with a disc but the lid open or you have the auto start option disabled, you will get the menu screen.

Once in the menu screen, when you close the lid you will see the message Please wait whle disc is being checked. I start on this screen on porpouse so that people can see Im using a disc.

Blackflag82 thanked this post

Snowflake, datagod liked this post

I had a lot of opinions that I compromised on them. My favorite example is allowing super ganebky is atrocious. But you can’t chabge the rules in the middle, the refs allowed it fir years it’s obly fair we do to

Direct feed to vcr was used for years.

As for acam/funspot I do think it’s proven itself to only have real boards and if anyone can show even a single machine of theirs isn’t authentic then sure it raises questions about them all. I think your skepticism is good if you had taken the angle if trying to caste reasonable suspicion on funspot rather than trying to get through your own bisrdless submission that space invaders in particular I felt was very sketchy, well you made things worse man. Now that’s not all on you, if your goal was to prove people are to trusting I guess you succeeded but you also pushed things more in that direction making it worse

You know to improve things? Set the example. When I had the means I made a point to show my hands even. Like you I want more thorough evidence much more thorough. Like you I also think adjudicators are often too lazy. But unlike you I try to improve that by setting the example whereas you push to make things worse to make s point

Go on raising concerns. Go on pushing fir change. And the best way to push fir change is set the example in addition to making those complaints

For funspot in particular we just need an example they’re willing to have a single reproduction on property. For direct feed study it learn to either identify the real or make a write up proving noome can tell the difference

By the way I do think we need to stop accepting copies of copies. A camera pointed at a screen that’s playing back direct feed was acceptable at one point but the time to accept that has passed

datagod liked this post

John,

Your response here boils down to - "I don't know anything about this system, but I'm going to be upset that it doesn't adhere to the guidelines I deem essential" (regardless to whether those guidelines are actually essential).

This is very similar to your tantrums about arcade boards. It seems that you are still not able to grasp the concept that things (including video games) do not exist in a vacuum. oh well.

datagod liked this post

Before TGSAP, most submission were done via direct capture to VCR tape or CD which means the console was never shown. The rule was always that you must show boot up. I'm not an expert on all consoles but the ones I am you can tell it's an original console via the boot up. As long as direct capture submission have that, then I'm good.

Blackflag82, datagod liked this post

if this is of any use to you, here are a couple of games that do not work properly with my direct capture device and I used a handheld camera and showed the console at the end.

https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/194432

https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/194314

Blackflag82 liked this post

If you're going to adjudicate someone's score, give them the courtesy of being knowledgable about what you watch. You could have easily asked about it in a particular submission instead of blasting your intolerance on the main blog area. This isn't the tgsap's fault, just your own ignorance of the certain console.

There are a great many collectors here and if you have questions about these things, we are more than willing to give advice.

EVN liked this post

Originally Posted by Snowflake

I had a lot of opinions that I compromised on them. My favorite example is allowing super ganebky is atrocious. But you can’t chabge the rules in the middle, the refs allowed it fir years it’s obly fair we do to

Direct feed to vcr was used for years.

As for acam/funspot I do think it’s proven itself to only have real boards and if anyone can show even a single machine of theirs isn’t authentic then sure it raises questions about them all. I think your skepticism is good if you had taken the angle if trying to caste reasonable suspicion on funspot rather than trying to get through your own bisrdless submission that space invaders in particular I felt was very sketchy, well you made things worse man. Now that’s not all on you, if your goal was to prove people are to trusting I guess you succeeded but you also pushed things more in that direction making it worse

You know to improve things? Set the example. When I had the means I made a point to show my hands even. Like you I want more thorough evidence much more thorough. Like you I also think adjudicators are often too lazy. But unlike you I try to improve that by setting the example whereas you push to make things worse to make s point

Go on raising concerns. Go on pushing fir change. And the best way to push fir change is set the example in addition to making those complaints

For funspot in particular we just need an example they’re willing to have a single reproduction on property. For direct feed study it learn to either identify the real or make a write up proving noome can tell the difference

By the way I do think we need to stop accepting copies of copies. A camera pointed at a screen that’s playing back direct feed was acceptable at one point but the time to accept that has passed

Thanks for the advice - but why didn't you show you were playing on an original console? This is not a hissy fit - could I not make the same evidence as you have provided using emulation?

Originally Posted by John73

Thanks for the advice - but why didn't you show you were playing on an original console? This is not a hissy fit - could I not make the same evidence as you have provided using emulation?

It's got to do with standards - there were standards 5 or 10 years ago, now with TGSAP - that has been thrown out the window.

5 or 10 years ago, if you didn't show your console, if you didn't show your 100% original disc - I'm sure the ref's at that stage would have just chucked out your submission - or at least I hope they would have.

We have very short memories of Billy & Todd - two of the most trusted TG record holders and referee's - now all of a sudden we are letting stuff in that in the past would be a no-brainer "reject"

Originally Posted by John73

Thanks for the advice - but why didn't you show you were playing on an original console? This is not a hissy fit - could I not make the same evidence as you have provided using emulation?

i'm not sure what youre referring to. With my big screen i could get a good view of the camera and me and even showed my hands. with my smaller screen, a view of me would make the tv too small. I do very often show the console now as well, except a few early times when i forgot o/didnt see the point. You see, i still maintain showing console itself proves nothing if you dont show wires -- showing hands proves something, console not so much. However, a better question might be "if showing console means nothing why do you do it". I do it, because it doesnt hurt, and if it'll my stuff get adjudicated, whatever, i'll show my console. my attitude was always been "if it doesnt matter then give in". I argue on even the most minor of points, cause to me if it matters even a little, it matters. but a point that i truly believe doesnt matter at all, i'll give in. so thats why i often show console even when you dont see wires or hands, its just me compromising.

as for could you make the same evidence i've provided using emulation, well showing console doesnt prevent that. if you dont know how to use emulator yet still show consle in the evidence package i'm not gonna be the one to provide tutorials on cheating. also, i guess anything is possible, even the very best evidence packages can be faked, its a matter of probability. I dont got a problem admitting my worst evidence package is galaxian for the atari 2600, that one alone you might be able to fake. but the score isnt that good since theres not much motivation to fake. I'm not aware of a single other score of mine where the evidence has even the slightest of doubt, i'm genuinely curious which of my s cores you think could be faked.

Originally Posted by John73

It's got to do with standards - there were standards 5 or 10 years ago, now with TGSAP - that has been thrown out the window.

5 or 10 years ago, if you didn't show your console, if you didn't show your 100% original disc - I'm sure the ref's at that stage would have just chucked out your submission - or at least I hope they would have.

We have very short memories of Billy & Todd - two of the most trusted TG record holders and referee's - now all of a sudden we are letting stuff in that in the past would be a no-brainer "reject"

this tells me you havent been reading our response. you're 100% wrong there. The refs did allow direct feed for yeas as was already stated in comments on this very thread. So actually, no standards were thrown out the window, the standards that allow that now were always around. This shows you're just making up things about the past, as well as ignoring comments being given. We're listening to what you say, but it appears you're not even reading our responses. Obviously if you're unwlling to learn you're not gonna understand your flaws. By all means, argue, share your points of view, but take some time to research and actually learn what it is you're arguing. your argument will be far more effective if its fact based.

Pixe Sukola thanked this post

Originally Posted by Pixe Sukola

if this is of any use to you, here are a couple of games that do not work properly with my direct capture device and I used a handheld camera and showed the console at the end.

https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/194432

https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/194314

No it doesn't help - why you ask?

I recently had a score submission accepted on Space Invaders - Arcade.... https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/190479

I didn't show the PCB on this, it had been shown previously at the same arcade on a lower score.

I recently had a score rejected on Moon Patrol - Arcade.... https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/190481-Arcade-Moon-Patrol-Points-116-950-John-McNeill?p=1023366#post1023366

I didn't show the PCB on this, it had been shown previously at the same arcade on a lower score.

Now - if you can explain to me, or if anyone can explain to me why one score passed adjudication and the other didn't then I will personally send you A$100

Both games were same arcade, both games were at the same place where I had already accepted scores showed the PCB - both games in my new submissions omitted to show the PCB's but did show enough that they were at the same arcade.

I know you think I am completely mad - but honestly, can you not see what I'm getting at?

So if one of your games on another submission showed your original console - how hard would it be for you to show the console again? Do you own the game - we'll never know, because you didn't show the console of or the original game.

Please - I'm stupid, explain it to me?

Originally Posted by John73

No it doesn't help - why you ask?

I recently had a score submission accepted on Space Invaders - Arcade.... https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/190479

I didn't show the PCB on this, it had been shown previously at the same arcade on a lower score.

I recently had a score rejected on Moon Patrol - Arcade.... https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/190481-Arcade-Moon-Patrol-Points-116-950-John-McNeill?p=1023366#post1023366

I didn't show the PCB on this, it had been shown previously at the same arcade on a lower score.

Now - if you can explain to me, or if anyone can explain to me why one score passed adjudication and the other didn't then I will personally send you A$100

Both games were same arcade, both games were at the same place where I had already accepted scores showed the PCB - both games in my new submissions omitted to show the PCB's but did show enough that they were at the same arcade.

I know you think I am completely mad - but honestly, can you not see what I'm getting at?

So if one of your games on another submission showed your original console - how hard would it be for you to show the console again? Do you own the game - we'll never know, because you didn't show the console of or the original game.

Please - I'm stupid, explain it to me?

ok, i think this reply of yours is very reasonable. Yes, when you have different adjudciators theres bound to be some inconsistency. When you're evidence package is sitting right on the fence of acceptability, when you're right on the edge then yeah it can go either way. Thats what happened, you made a bare minimum evidence right on the edge that some were ok with and some werent.

Look even with the most exact science, when you put something right on the edge, even the best instruments are sometimes gonna register a little over the edge and sometimes a little under. Both scores had debate. Both discussions really showed the community was split. Both showed such a score could go eitehr way. In that regard it was consistent, it was consistent that an evidence package like that is dicey, on the edge, and may or may not go through.

No matter what our standards are, there will always be someone able to find something right on the edge. I dont see this as inconsistency so much as you managed to find a way to put adjudciators in a tough place.

Honestly, i thnk your space invaders was less acceptable than moon patrol, so i'm in the exact opposite view point of the overall voters clearly. but again, thats to be expected when you manage to blur the lines like you did.

as for daniel, he expressed why he doesnt show his console, and i accept that. I would agree if someone goes out of their way to avoid showing console thats a redflag. But when they have a good reason, combined with me knowing they really do own one, combined with the gameplay itself showing everything is fine, combined with a high quality direct feed that can be analyzed, i'm satisfid

Barthax liked this post

Originally Posted by Snowflake

Direct feed to vcr was used for years.

Back in the VCR days, emulation on PC of arcade and console - well, it didn't exist as we know it now. Well yeah, MAME was around, but as we know know, it wasn't perfect - hence Billy being stripped of his records.

Direct feed now - I'm guessing that 99.9% of those voting would have no idea if direct feed is from emulation or an original console - you just wouldn't know because emulation is so spot on.

Originally Posted by Snowflake

As for acam/funspot I do think it’s proven itself to only have real boards and if anyone can show even a single machine of theirs isn’t authentic then sure it raises questions about them all. I think your skepticism is good if you had taken the angle if trying to caste reasonable suspicion on funspot rather than trying to get through your own bisrdless submission that space invaders in particular I felt was very sketchy, well you made things worse man. Now that’s not all on you, if your goal was to prove people are to trusting I guess you succeeded but you also pushed things more in that direction making it worse

I mentioned in a submission for a funspot score that I had it on very very good advice that their Dragon's Lair is not running an original - it's running Daphne - I don't care if I'm right or wrong - but if I am right, then doesn't that call into question all of their games?

As crap as the 60-1 boards are on certain games, they do emulate 100% on a lot of games. If you are going to use Daphne in a Dragon's Lair to keep it on the floor because it is more reliable, then wouldn't it stand to reason that you might also do the same for another title?

Originally Posted by Snowflake

You know to improve things? Set the example. When I had the means I made a point to show my hands even. Like you I want more thorough evidence much more thorough. Like you I also think adjudicators are often too lazy. But unlike you I try to improve that by setting the example whereas you push to make things worse to make s point

I've tried to set the example - it doesn't make any difference - it seems to me some submitters are getting their scores passed without scrutiny - I can remove the ROM's and show me putting them through a ROM reader - it won't make a lick of difference when others get their scores passed because they are known/trusted members of the community.... Todd was a trusted member of the community, as was Billy - how did that work out?

Originally Posted by Snowflake

Go on raising concerns. Go on pushing fir change. And the best way to push fir change is set the example in addition to making those complaints

I'm sorry, I've been raising concerns for well over 1 year now - it falls on deaf ears.

Originally Posted by Snowflake

ok, i think this reply of yours is very reasonable. Yes, when you have different adjudciators theres bound to be some inconsistency. When you're evidence package is sitting right on the fence of acceptability, when you're right on the edge then yeah it can go either way. Thats what happened, you made a bare minimum evidence right on the edge that some were ok with and some werent.

Look even with the most exact science, when you put something right on the edge, even the best instruments are sometimes gonna register a little over the edge and sometimes a little under. Both scores had debate. Both discussions really showed the community was split. Both showed such a score could go eitehr way. In that regard it was consistent, it was consistent that an evidence package like that is dicey, on the edge, and may or may not go through.

No matter what our standards are, there will always be someone able to find something right on the edge. I dont see this as inconsistency so much as you managed to find a way to put adjudciators in a tough place.

Honestly, i thnk your space invaders was less acceptable than moon patrol, so i'm in the exact opposite view point of the overall voters clearly. but again, thats to be expected when you manage to blur the lines like you did.

as for daniel, he expressed why he doesnt show his console, and i accept that. I would agree if someone goes out of their way to avoid showing console thats a redflag. But when they have a good reason, combined with me knowing they really do own one, combined with the gameplay itself showing everything is fine, combined with a high quality direct feed that can be analyzed, i'm satisfid

And you have just, without knowing it possibly, agreed with my point.

One score is in, the other is out.

So I know have precedence to submit scores on Space Invaders without showing the PCB.

This is my point. I'm not as Daniel put it "throwing a hissy fit" - I'm just saying that there needs to be a set of clear and concise guidelines for arcade/console/emulation - you either do it or you don't, and it doesn't make a lick of difference if you have enough "friends" on Twin Galaxies - your score will never ever get accepted if you don't follow the simple basics.

Originally Posted by Snowflake

this tells me you havent been reading our response. you're 100% wrong there. The refs did allow direct feed for yeas as was already stated in comments on this very thread. So actually, no standards were thrown out the window, the standards that allow that now were always around. This shows you're just making up things about the past, as well as ignoring comments being given. We're listening to what you say, but it appears you're not even reading our responses. Obviously if you're unwlling to learn you're not gonna understand your flaws. By all means, argue, share your points of view, but take some time to research and actually learn what it is you're arguing. your argument will be far more effective if its fact based.

I have been reading the responses, and I'm well aware of the days of Twin Galaxies being run by Walter what was asked of players when submitting scores - if referee's didn't do the right thing back then, well there is nothing I can do about it because the video proof is now lost.

What I can do here and now, is try to maintain minimum standards that were asked of players BITD - but as I said in my original post - it seems the community could care less and just let anything though.

well like i say, even with a clear line, when you're sitting on the line there will still be confusion, thats unavoidable.

however, i will grant you, the lack of ruling on board, and some other things creates confusion. Jace was of the philosophy every rule has an acception so he wanted just the rule "do you believe its real". I see both your and his point of view. I dont need to explain to you the strengths of your point of view. The strengths of jace's point of view, is any hard and fast rule will have excpetions wehre good scores get thrown out due to rules that dont apply. We wanted us to have flexibility to make the best possible decisions. My stance is actually a little closer to your stance than it is to Jace, but at the same time since jace has a lot of merit to his stance as well i'm not gonna get to worked up over it

another suggestion i would make, is let people handle their own thing. When redelf broke the rules for donkey kong, but all the kong players were ok with it, i accepted it. when rtm broke the rules for super galaxian on mame and all the mame players were ok with it, i moved on. On arcade or atari, where i compete, i'd flip out a lot more. You seem to truly care about about arcade so i care alittle more about your complaints there, wheres your complaints on dreamcast come off as just bossy. so lets talk about board

i also want board to be shown -- or a ruling that board doesnt have to be original. I hate the whole "we have a rule that you must do X, but no rule that you must prove you did x". yes i agree, whats the point of a rule thats not going to be enforced. I do think that point could be argued very serioulsy and professionally if you focused on your exact concerns instead of pretending you wanted boardless submissions to go through and submitting accoringly. we really do need something done about the whole "board must be original but no need to prove its original" mindset. you and i are actually very close on that point, my biggest issue is the way you approach it i htink makes it worse.

John73 liked this post

Originally Posted by Snowflake

well like i say, even with a clear line, when you're sitting on the line there will still be confusion, thats unavoidable.

however, i will grant you, the lack of ruling on board, and some other things creates confusion. Jace was of the philosophy every rule has an acception so he wanted just the rule "do you believe its real". I see both your and his point of view. I dont need to explain to you the strengths of your point of view. The strengths of jace's point of view, is any hard and fast rule will have excpetions wehre good scores get thrown out due to rules that dont apply. We wanted us to have flexibility to make the best possible decisions. My stance is actually a little closer to your stance than it is to Jace, but at the same time since jace has a lot of merit to his stance as well i'm not gonna get to worked up over it

another suggestion i would make, is let people handle their own thing. When redelf broke the rules for donkey kong, but all the kong players were ok with it, i accepted it. when rtm broke the rules for super galaxian on mame and all the mame players were ok with it, i moved on. On arcade or atari, where i compete, i'd flip out a lot more. You seem to truly care about about arcade so i care alittle more about your complaints there, wheres your complaints on dreamcast come off as just bossy. so lets talk about board

i also want board to be shown -- or a ruling that board doesnt have to be original. I hate the whole "we have a rule that you must do X, but no rule that you must prove you did x". yes i agree, whats the point of a rule thats not going to be enforced. I do think that point could be argued very serioulsy and professionally if you focused on your exact concerns instead of pretending you wanted boardless submissions to go through and submitting accoringly. we really do need something done about the whole "board must be original but no need to prove its original" mindset. you and i are actually very close on that point, my biggest issue is the way you approach it i htink makes it worse.

I understand where Jace is coming from - but given the scrutiny that he and TG went to over Billy's faked scores, and Todd's faked scores, it seems strange to me that we are now sliding back into bad habits when accepting scores.

To go above and beyond to make sure your score is acceptable.... BITD, I went to the trouble to buy a bootleg/licenced or otherwise original Bump 'n' Jump board from the USA. I could have bought the actual original Burnin' Rubber board a lot easier - but as it happens, Twin Galaxies is USA based, so I followed the rules - I spent close to A$200 to buy the board with postage so I could set a world record.

Now what are we accepting? We take Funspot at their word, we take players word that their direct feed is an original console.. I'm sorry, it doesn't make any sense to me.

well i dont mind saying it doesnt make sense, but you're acting as if this is new. funspot was accepted by refs as was direct feed. i dont mind saying we should improve, but lets not pretend we're somehow more lax than the refs were.

another thing i'm thinking of with you, is honestly, the exact opposite of you, so dont take this as me accusing you of being like donkeykonggenius -- you're not. youre the opposite, but opposites are just different points on the same line and i think theres something relevant that applies here

Corey took the exact opposite angle of you. he wanted no hard rules, just experts determinging everyghing. He's the sort of guy that will say "is this a chair" then when you say yes he'll remove one leg and say "is it still a chair", he'll keep pushing till he finds some line noone can agree on and then replay "but this other things thats so close you were fine with, whats wrong with one more inch".

Corey kept on pushing further and further away from acceptable inches at a time. he made submissions just to make a point.

like i say, he's the opposite of you. i'm just highlighting him to further explain my point of there will always be corner cases.

btw i really have been thinking of the funspot thing a lot. even though i believe them, i can see reason to stop giving them the exception. i do think its open for discussion. on the flip side i think gallophing ghost is open to discussion on trusting. even your arcade, after it gets enough submission i'm open on being more flexible on.