That's not correct at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by datagod
Adding a coin to extend time on a racing game affect the game's internal time, and gives you more time to complete the race
Adding a coin on PC10, does not affect the game's internal time, it does not give you more time to complete a SMB level. It affect the external timer that suspends play of the machine itself.
this is more analagous to the dragons lair dispute.
the spirit behind the continues rule was you could just buy yourself a score. admittedly, buying time in this fashion doesnt violate that. if this was the only way to buy time in a game the no continues rule likely would've never been created.
that said, the fact is, the no continues rule was created and this does use continues. the rules were cut and paste from another track really showing the track creator didnt have much clue about what was going on (kinda par for the course for old tg) and doesnt prove the track was created against ownership rules, but certianly adds to that case. we have witness testimony in both directions.
I still think the real thing that actually can be proven is the whole "but walter said..." excuse. surely Jace knows the ownership history of his own company. One side says walter still owned and was in charge at this time which is why he could sell it to jace later. Another side says walter sold it, but thx to a clause, reclaimed it later and was therefore able to sell to jace. Sure seems like legal proof of ownership and records should exist somewhere to determine once and for all if walter actually had any authority at the time.
If @Jace Hall or @Dave Hawksett could provide insite into the history of TG ownership i could probably end this debate fairly quickly
^should of said "it could" didnt mean "i could". i normally wouldn't leave a second comment for such a typo, but i dont feel like dealing with the wave of "omg snowflake thinks he owns tg and can end disputes".
You could argue "spirit of the game" and all that.Quote:
Originally Posted by sdwyer138
On this particular machine, adding coins does indeed act as a continue. The manufacturer wanted you to get 5 minutes of game play per token/credit. Add more to continue is exactly what happens.
I think seeing how high a score you can get in 5 minutes is far more interesting than seeing what you can do with endless continues. Game play is no different than on the NES, as far as I am aware.
Sorry to say it, but this track is garbage.
It's an interesting general question, but Walter's role in this situation is arguably moot since TG referees directly confronted the issue of tracking this title when they "regrouped" for discussion after Joel was congratulated for his score.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowflake
https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthr...per-Mario-Bros
I think it's safe to say that Walter wielded authority, at minimum, in his role as "spiritual father" of TG in 2011; whether he actually "owned" TG or not and therefore had the "right" to create a track, TG refs later examined the presence of the track on their own and retained it, along with Joel's score.
The dispute was originally posited on Triforce's illegal use of continues beyond a 5 minute increment of game time. Yet Joel's score submission was subsequently adjudicated and accepted by a TG referee, and retained by TG after questions about tracking a PC 10 title were raised. According to Scott's post in the thread above, the reason he was told TG traditionally avoided tracking Play Choice 10 titles wasn't because of the game play timer, but in order guard against "watering down the scoreboard" with re-releases since PC 10 are essentially NES games. Throughout the 2012 discussion there was no assertion that Joel accomplished his feat in 5 minutes, nor did I come across any posts where this issue was raised as a reason to reject his score of 835,050. Perhaps in the absence of Joel's score, things would be murkier, but in view of its acceptance I don't see a basis for claiming a "no continues" violation in Triforce's case.
you know i remember this being brought up before, my bad on memory, just reread it. i disagree of some of what you say based on whats there, never the less a good point is made.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Evener
I dont agree walter's past gave him any authority -- unless of course the owners at the time said it did. Also, that thread seems to indicate joel was the first, implying triforce score wasnt up at the time and that the track itself was being debated if it should exist.
Never the less,it does show it was added and people certainly new of it. it shows multiple continues were allowed. Whoever added this track back, well that shows its more than just walter and one ref trifroce had influence over. it also shows others were allowed to submit. and certainly that thread brought it to refs attention who could remove it.
at this point i've got alot of curiosity, as it still seems something weird was there -- with that thread showing members and former refs confused about whats going on, but weird or not, it happened.
I know its happened before individuals scores were removed by one ref, and then later added back by another
I know entire tracks and every valid score on them had been removed by one ref, and then added back by another (unfortnatlye the track, not all the lost valid scores).
so ok, i guess i'll just reiterate the previous call to update the rules to be correct then.
At this point I am leaning towards requesting the rules to be updated to clearly state that continues are allowed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowflake
It makes the track ridiculous, but we all find joy in ridiculous things.
Ummm yes sir please just update the rules. Please and thank you. Nothing further is needed to silence this indignance. God I’m tired.
Jace has stated many times that rules will never be updated, however. Unless he has changed his mind for some reason.