Originally Posted by thegamer1185

Man, this was such a fun game. Haven't played it in 30yrs I bet. So this is kind of stupid, but upon your partners death and when the "Game Over" sign pops up, your score at the time is 3,528,810. You gained a few points when you set your controller down and the enemies were dying on your respawn. I believe you used the end game display for your score along with his. I have a final score upon his death at 6,543,785. I'll see what others think, but I would vote no (shamefully).

The rules about how 2-player scores are calculated on the NES are pretty much nonexistent. There are basically two schools of thought.

Method 1: Once one of the two players loses all of their lives and would have to continue, the scoring stops and you combine the two scores. "All of their lives" can refer to a TGTS 5 life maximum or simply getting a game over.

Method 2: Both players play until both players have exhausted all of their lives allotted, then the total score is calculated.

I can cite cases where both methods have been used on NES games, even on very recent scoring approvals. In the case of this particular track, nothing in the track rule states that one of the players cannot keep playing after one of the players gets a game over. I think most people believe that one player shouldn't be carrying the other player for some reason but I personally do not find much merit in this way of thinking. Furthermore, I believe method 1 was instituted to prevent the second player from simply dying off very early on or a single-player allowing the second player to die off without controlling it at all. These two ways of thinking come from an arcade perspective in my opinion.

The amount of points I gained after the second player lost his last life is 5,020 (based on your calculation). This is 5,020 points of over 6.5 million scored. This accounts for 0.07% of the points scored.

I respect your opinion to vote no if you choose to do that. I would encourage you to change your mind to vote yes or at the very least refrain from voting because this run does not violate any stated track rules I'm aware of. I am open to hearing anyone else's opinions or evidence.

Originally Posted by EightBitSteve

The rules about how 2-player scores are calculated on the NES are pretty much nonexistent. There are basically two schools of thought.

Method 1: Once one of the two players loses all of their lives and would have to continue, the scoring stops and you combine the two scores. "All of their lives" can refer to a TGTS 5 life maximum or simply getting a game over.

Method 2: Both players play until both players have exhausted all of their lives allotted, then the total score is calculated.

I can cite cases where both methods have been used on NES games, even on very recent scoring approvals. In the case of this particular track, nothing in the track rule states that one of the players cannot keep playing after one of the players gets a game over. I think most people believe that one player shouldn't be carrying the other player for some reason but I personally do not find much merit in this way of thinking. Furthermore, I believe method 1 was instituted to prevent the second player from simply dying off very early on or a single-player allowing the second player to die off without controlling it at all. These two ways of thinking come from an arcade perspective in my opinion.

The amount of points I gained after the second player lost his last life is 5,020 (based on your calculation). This is 5,020 points of over 6.5 million scored. This accounts for 0.07% of the points scored.

I respect your opinion to vote no if you choose to do that. I would encourage you to change your mind to vote yes or at the very least refrain from voting because this run does not violate any stated track rules I'm aware of. I am open to hearing anyone else's opinions or evidence.

Yeah, I haven't actually voted on it yet, but that is how I would do 2P games. The 2P rules are inconsistent as hell. I read through all the 2p threads last night, and a few people are saying that the before times used to let people continue play after someone had a game over. So with that being said, I am all for voting yes on this. I'm all for the submitter. It will be a massive debate, but getting an actual ruling on how TGSAP should do it would be great.

Originally Posted by thegamer1185

Yeah, I haven't actually voted on it yet, but that is how I would do 2P games. The 2P rules are inconsistent as hell. I read through all the 2p threads last night, and a few people are saying that the before times used to let people continue play after someone had a game over. So with that being said, I am all for voting yes on this. I'm all for the submitter. It will be a massive debate, but getting an actual ruling on how TGSAP should do it would be great.

I think as long as there are actually two players present, and both players are playing for a vast majority of the game, the rest is all semantics. Just my thoughts though.

Start :43
Final





JJT_Defender
Honored Veteran
Credibility:30761
Submission points: 27796
6,543,785

A Wr