Snowflake's Feed

01-09-2019 at 09:31 PM
Rate this Entry

Identifying setting by site

@Dave">@Dave Hawksett too since i dont know if dave thinks this is worth the effort

Plenty of games at least on intellivision, when you select the setting theres no obvious way to know what setting was selected unless you show the controller, or if the viewer is just intimately familiar with the game and can identify setting by gameplay

for direct feed showing the controller isnt possible, even with a camera due to wire lengths though it can be hassle. Would it be worthwhile to update rules with information on how adjudicators can identify setting by game play alone?

For example i'm currently working through pole position which has 4 tracks. If the rules were updated to say how to identify each track based on the turns (each track can be uniquely identified by its turns) then direct feed or simply not showing the controller would make adjudciations much easier

  1. Dave Hawksett's Avatar
    This sounds like it could be useful. Do you want to suggest some specifics?
  2. GibGirl's Avatar

    What if... there was a link on the page for a game that went to a wiki page for that specific game? Would that work as a place to put that kind of information?

  3. Snowflake's Avatar

    We have that ability now with the ability to leave comments on the track itself I try to do that very sparingly though to avoid clutter. I like your idea just a link there. Do you think a wiki page for so many individual games is wise though ?

  4. GibGirl's Avatar

    Wiki pages are much more flexible and useful in this manner, and I think having a page per game instead of "comments" for a track would mean less duplication of content and more clarity. Wiki pages would be cleanly formatted and edited as needed, versus comment threads which will get longer and messier over time.

    As far as the number of wiki pages - we should have as many as we need to help improve adjudication. If we find there are "too many" pages, maybe that means we need a bigger conversation about the number of games and/or tracks on the leaderboard.

  5. Snowflake's Avatar

    @GibGirl i like much of what yo usay but the last line concerns me. If this is going to be used an excuse to prevent people from creating new tracks, or even worse delete old tracks and throw out the valid scores on those tracks then something i want nothing to do with.

  6. Snowflake's Avatar

    @Dave Hawksett yes i absolutely have specifics. playing pole position on intellivision is what me request this. when you select the option, nothing on screens indicates you selected the option. no cursor, or color flashing or anything like that. only game play will show (or showing the controller of course) so to that end

    Pole Position Intellivsion
    Option 1 Fuji speedway

    You can identfiy the Fuji speedway track due to its turns being in this order:
    right, left, right, left, right, right, right

    Option 2 Madison 500

    You can identfiy the Madison 500 track due to its turns being in this order:

    left, right, left, right, right, left, right, left, right, left,right, right, left

    Option 3 Grand National

    You can identfiy the Grand National track due to its turns being in this order:

    right, right, right, right, left, left, left, left, left, right, right, right, right

    Option 4 Monoco Grand Prix

    You can identfiy the Monoco Grand Prixtrack due to its turns being in this order:

    right, right, left, right, left, right, right, right, right,left, right, left, right, right,

  7. Snowflake's Avatar

    @Rogerpoco you're the only other active member i know that plays this title. could you do me a favor and confirm the above?

    ThanksRogerpoco thanked this post
    LikesRogerpoco liked this post
  8. Rogerpoco's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake

    @Rogerpoco you're the only other active member i know that plays this title. could you do me a favor and confirm the above?

    Unfortunately, nope...

    My INT's:

    Neither works, I swear, just showing off the pic. Signature on one is...well, the Jordan of Int. Mike didn't win every game-but he was amazing. (Off track, sorry).

    No, timing, not ego, if my Int worked, I swear I would be competing with you(uhh...trying) on the PP, I could TOTALLY see pulling it out of the shelf to try, I didn't hate it at all, and the racers are my bag, atm.



  9. GibGirl's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake

    @GibGirl i like much of what yo usay but the last line concerns me. If this is going to be used an excuse to prevent people from creating new tracks, or even worse delete old tracks and throw out the valid scores on those tracks then something i want nothing to do with.

    Let's not worry until we get to a point at which this "there are too many wiki pages" thing actually looks relevant.

  10. Desidious's Avatar

    Some games shouldn't be direct captured. Quit being complicated.

    Its almost like you're one of those idiots that thinks Australia doesn't exist or something.

    Likessdwyer138 liked this post
  11. Ninglendo's Avatar

    I just wanna remind people that it is easier to catch a splice via direct capture than a live feed.

    Thanksbensweeneyonbass thanked this post
    LikesEVN liked this post
  12. trivia212005's Avatar

    I have ad blocker that's why it's affecting some of the videos. Whenever I pause the ad blocker, it doesn't freeze.

  13. Desidious's Avatar

    Don't listen to Glen, it's a conspiracy!

  14. Snowflake's Avatar

    a thx to gibirl for honest disagreement as well as useful advice

    all you clown however, ug, well i clown around too so i cant complain but gosh dang it, i was trying to help tg here.

  15. Desidious's Avatar

    Well if you thought Australia was real we wouldn't be here.

    Let TG sort themselves out first before we put more on their plate.

  16. Snowflake's Avatar

    look brandon of cousre i know austrlia isnt real. isnt that why rejected allen's tracks? cause you have to be a real person to subit?

  17. Desidious's Avatar

    Staal is lit. Too bad you can't see is a beacon of light in the Earth's nether regions.

  18. bensweeneyonbass's Avatar

    I typed a big long response then realized it was too much, so here's the gist:

    People either want to help TGSAP run more smoothly or they don't care. Or maybe they want it to fail (outlier case I would imagine). TG can only do so much to channel and manage submission behavior.

    Pooling some body of information or references in a Wiki is like saying "Well I know you won't tell me anything, so I'll just go out and collect all the information I think you have." This type of body of information is dangerous - it may or may not be prepared by knowledgeable persons, and it may mislead someone if it's incomplete or juxtaposed a certain way.

    (side note - Wiki should exist but Adjudication-related Wiki should represent adjudication precedents and not "Here's How To Prove It's On Easy Mode" without any TGSAP decision to base it on)

    Here's my baby step toward coaching TGSAP participants - a Hardware Settings Flag.

    Tag all consoles that have hardware settings (INT and Atari A/B switches, as well as Arcade platform since many PCBs have hardware settings too). Make it so that when you submit, it adds a line item to your message, or an extra frame in the pane, that says "This submission is on a platform for which games may have hardware settings in addition to or instead of in-game settings."

    That's it. Not a fixer but I think we need to stop trying to "fix" TGSAP behavior and start coaching it in the responsible direction. Make submitters and adjudicators more responsible for their claims.

    ^If that was my abbreviated response, imagine what my full-length diatribe was like :)

    Thanksdatagod thanked this post
    Likesdatagod liked this post
  19. Snowflake's Avatar

    Ben, I can just say in my submission how to verify by turns taken that ichose the right track and likely everyone will believe me.

    not that i have a problem with being trusted, but i think trust is scary. As much as i like the trust i've earned i'd rather people not resort to trust when other options exist. granted if i single handedly created the wiki page to get my sub through it would still be trust based, but at least it could be verified by others, and something like wiki, or direct rules update, would have a lot more eyes on it and can be referecned alot more so can be gotten right

    theres been plenty of atari titles as well where a more knowledgable member ways in and everyone trusts him/her

    theres a lotof trust when it comes to verifrying by gameplay. and to be fair, that trust has been earned, but even still i'm suggesting we try something even better than trust. i understand "dont fix it if it aint broken" but in this case i see no downsides to the preemptive fix.

    Thanksdatagod thanked this post
    Likesdatagod liked this post
  20. bensweeneyonbass's Avatar

    I'll rephrase my position on a Wiki for this venue of consideration:

    The most elegant solution I can think of that represents my opinion on a TG "settings" Wiki (or however you'd like to characterize it) is one that involves the ability to directly link submissions to them and make them a primary focus of the system. Open or closed submissions, and disputes as well. When you link you can link it as in support of or contrary to the information on the page. This holds the most weight in my eyes as it's driven and ranked by community decisions. As an example - If someone creates a page for the once-accepted stringent Donkey Kong arcade rules, users could link submissions to that page that have passed without such stringent rules. Or slightly different - create a page on how a current trend in Donkey Kong arcade settings focuses on these key elements, then link the same submissions. Or the first rules page with submissions that are known to have followed the full set of rules. And so on. Flexible. Pages can be compared according to the number of submissions and disputes linked to them and even by what percentage of "unanimity" those linked submissions have.

    If a system like this existed as a means of vetting the information and giving it some form of credence in a world where trusting in people/information is all we've had for so long, I would be in support of it.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Join us