Moderator: JC Denton
by icycalm » 18 May 2012 01:03
by icycalm » 18 May 2012 12:54
by icycalm » 18 May 2012 13:01
by icycalm » 18 May 2012 13:16
by icycalm » 18 May 2012 13:22
Udderdude wrote:You'd only end up pissing off both players who play for score, and players who just want to play the game without worrying about advanced mechanics.
by icycalm » 18 May 2012 16:08
TrevHead (TVR) wrote:It's wierd how elistist sentiment on this forum has moved from mainstream credit feeders (which I feel is some truth to it) to 1CCers, I suppose soon everybody who doesnt have a WR under their belt are to be labelled a casual shitplayer :roll:
by icycalm » 18 May 2012 16:44
Blackbird wrote:Survival play is playing by ignoring the scoring system and concentrating only on progressing as far as you can.
You use the optimal weapon for the situation, regardless of whether it is the ideal weapon for score. Perfect example of this is using shot to sweep/kill popcorns more rapidly in Futari Original, regardless of what color the counter is in. Another example would be ignoring proper weapon usage on boss death; glancing at the health bar to determine the timing for weapon switch is a distraction (however small) that could kill you if you're in the middle of dodging a pattern.
Another obvious example is putting distance between yourself and the target when it makes it easier to dodge the bullets. Playing further away in games that utilize point-blanking as a scoring mechanic (Ketsui, etc.) makes it easier to survive in a lot of situations, at the expense of score.
Scoring is about risk versus reward; increasing your risk so your reward (score) is higher. Survival is about minimizing risk. These strategies aren't always mutually exclusive, though; sometimes the optimal way to score in a section is also the optimal way to dodge it.
by void » 18 May 2012 20:56
by icycalm » 18 May 2012 21:44
by icycalm » 18 May 2012 23:34
by icycalm » 11 Aug 2012 16:57
Let me remind everyone that shooting guns is an Olympic sport. If you don't believe me, just google it, or watch your TV. Yes, shooting guns is an Olympic sport. Are those people athletes? Shooting doesn't require any exercise. In fact, when you shoot, you want to be as still as possible, you don't want to move a muscle because you might miss a shot. So shooters are actually doing the opposite of normal athletes, that is they're not moving. Video games are highly competitive, and competition is the essential foundation of the Olympics. So video gamers should be considered athletes the same as gun shooters.
Shoggy wrote:No one should be surprised guns are in the Olympics. Where does this guy think the origins of events such as javelin throwing and archery events are? BECAUSE THEY USED TO BE IMPORTANT WAR AND HUNTING SKILLS. THE OLYMPICS HAS ALWAYS HAD "COMBAT SPORTS" IN IT. We use guns to fight each other, of course they are going to be in the Olympics in some form.
@ the post about esports not being athletes because lack of physicalitly if u look up the origin of the word from greek it has nothing to do with being physical it meant "one who competes for a prize" just saying
by icycalm » 28 Sep 2012 18:22
Cagar wrote:"The arrange mode is something that’s atypical of the Dodonpachi we know"
Dodongaluda confirmed. Kakusei mode turns your ship into flying element doll.
O. Van Bruce wrote:Cagar wrote:"The arrange mode is something that’s atypical of the Dodonpachi we know"
Dodongaluda confirmed. Kakusei mode turns your ship into flying element doll.
HOW WOULD THAT EVEN WORK?
moozooh wrote:You chain enemies with your hyper penis laser, the press the kakusei button and absorb bullets with your vagina aura to cash-in.
KAI wrote:O. Van Bruce wrote:HOW WOULD THAT EVEN WORK?
It will be something like this
Bananamatic wrote:Cagar wrote:"The arrange mode is something that’s atypical of the Dodonpachi we know"
Dodongaluda confirmed. Kakusei mode turns your ship into flying element doll.
all arranges are shit and this will be no exception
you heard it here first
DrTrouserPlank wrote:I will begrudgingly buy this and probably not play it.
Illyrian wrote:Don't forget to complain about it at as well.
Jeneki wrote:Meh Galuda gold. I DEMAND A SCREEN FULL OF KETSUI 50 CUBES!
KAI wrote:Arrange mode B
Love the new operator.
AweOfShe wrote:I would buy ten copies.
pestro87 wrote:Apart from the Ketsui 50 blocks and Galuda gold, I'm also expecting to see a second Hyper meter that you can trigger while you're on a Hyper à la DaiOuJou X-Mode :P
AntiFritz wrote:pestro87 wrote:Apart from the Ketsui 50 blocks and Galuda gold, I'm also expecting to see a second Hyper meter that you can trigger while you're on a Hyper à la DaiOuJou X-Mode :P
DOUBLE BREAK
Giest118 wrote:They'll obviously combine every scoring system. EVERY scoring system. The chaining from DFK, the multiplier cash-in from MushiFutari, the gakusei and bullet cancelling from Galuda; ALL OF THEM. The score from each system will be separate, and your total score will be all of the scores multiplied together. Every time the total score counterstops, it resets to zero and you get a counterstop point. If you counterstop the counterstop counter, you get an x16 multiplier to all of your scores and you add a point to your counterstop counter counter. The x16 stacks, meaning that if you counterstop the counterstop counter twice, you get an x256 multiplier. Three times and you get x4096. etc. If you make any mistakes in any of the systems, you lose that multiplier and have to start over again.
That one's free, Cave. You're welcome.
trap15 wrote:Worlds Greatest Scoring System
by icycalm » 10 Oct 2012 19:01
walrusdawg wrote:After all, video games are little more than algorithms: You input some numbers, you get some numbers back. Unless you're a numerologist how can you say that is "meaningful"?
walrusdawg wrote:If videogames are "transcending" anything, then they are transcending dull mathematics and becoming entertainment.
by icycalm » 10 Oct 2012 21:45
Rebecca Boyle wrote:Two virtual gamers have convinced a panel of judges they were more human than the humans they competed with in a first-person shooter game, winning the five-year-old BotPrize and beating the Turing test of machine awareness. The game bots were video game characters controlled by artificially intelligent algorithms.
One was created by computer scientists at the University of Texas at Austin, and the other by a doctoral student from Romania. The bots faced off in a game called "Unreal Tournament 2004,” in which each player tries to eliminate its opponents. Along with normal character-killing weapons, each player also had a “judging gun,” which they used to tag characters as humans or bots. The bot that is judged as the most human-like is the winner. The bots created by the two teams both achieved a humanness rating of 52 percent — way higher than average human players’ humanness rating of 40 percent, according to the BotPrize. The two teams will share the $7,000 first prize from sponsor 2K Games.
Watch below as the UT Austin bot, UT^2, kills a human opponent.
The victory comes during the 100th anniversary year of the birth of Alan Turing, the mathematician and father of computer science, whose “Turing test” is still the definition of machine intelligence. The best measure of artificial intelligence is whether it can fool people into thinking it’s one of us, he said.
Why make machines seem more human? In video games as in real life, humans are unpredictable — we hold grudges, make illogical decisions, make mistakes and learn from them, and so on. Robots don’t do this very well, or very convincingly. The BotPrize is an effort to design algorithms that can do it better. Eventually, video games, helper robots and even training simulators will feel more real, using research like this.
by icycalm » 11 Oct 2012 00:52
Rebecca Boyle wrote:Two virtual gamers have convinced a panel of judges they were more human than the humans they competed with in a first-person shooter game, winning the five-year-old BotPrize and beating the Turing test of machine awareness.
Rebecca Boyle wrote:The game bots were video game characters controlled by artificially intelligent algorithms.
by icycalm » 07 Dec 2012 08:17
Hi Scores
A forum for saving and showing off all your hi scores
by icycalm » 10 Dec 2012 23:06
Q-veta wrote:MichaelJLowell wrote:First off, if you're using "autistic" as an insult, you're an asshole.
Well that pretty much goes for all insults, that doesn't make me calling him that any less true.MichaelJLowell wrote:In authoring this site and reading discussion threads on the site, I gather that there are two thought processes for enjoying videogames: One is to view games as an experience and an illusion. The other thought process is to view games as systems. That is to say, aesthetics are secondary, and simply a means to justifying the ones and zeroes that drive the game. To compare it with movies, it's the difference between the guy who simply enjoys watching the movies and the guy who likes learning how all of the special effects are done.
The latter guy doesn't seem to actually enjoy movies and that's fine, but I'd wish he'd be sincere about it.MichaelJLowell wrote:Apparently, the latter makes you "autistic", and I think that's stupid.
It doesn't make you SHINY PONYTAic if you admit you only care about how the special effects are done or how the game is programmed or whatever. But Evilagram is not claiming that, he claims he likes video games. If he'd want some complex systems to pick apart I would think he would have found something more complex than Super Smash Bros. Melee by now.MichaelJLowell wrote:I lean somewhere in the middle of those two divergent lines of thought. I haven't given much thought to it, so I don't know which side I lean towards. Probably closer to the "systems" side, but I don't discount the "experience". But here's the problem: None of you do. From what I've been able to see, nobody on this web site even comes close.
Are we pretending that Evilagram hasn't been spouting "FUCK THE EXPERIENCE", "LOL AESTHETICS" and "MUH HEALTH PACKS" for months now?MichaelJLowell wrote:Everybody here values "games as experience" and "games as systems" to some degree, they just differ on how much, and nobody here reflects the fringe by any stretch.
Evilagram has outright said he only cares about the systems numerous times. He stated that he wouldn't mind playing a game that only has wireframes if the mechanics are good enough. I think he may have said the same thing about a game with only colored hitboxes but I'm not sure about that one, I don't remember every conversation in the IRC channel.MichaelJLowell wrote:I think it's particularly stupid to get worked up about it because, with little differences, we all seem to like the same games and I don't think anyone here is split on any particular game.
Actually the important thing is WHY we like the games. You can see this in the Dark Souls thread if you compare duderino's post to Evilagram's. Evilagram only seems to care about the combat and equipment and whatever moves you can do in PvP. And if he only cares about those things he could play something that does it better.MichaelJLowell wrote:2) The "pro-gaming" audience, who are completely disconnected from the effect and impact of aesthetics on the videogame experience because they solely look at games as an outlet for competitive urges. Games are readily and summarily dismissed if they are "non-competitive", "not balanced", or "lack a decent-sized community", because they are not interested in playing the best games, but in competing against large talent pools and becoming the best. As demonstrated through games like StarCraft II, Quake III Arena, and Unreal Tournament, players often play these games on the lowest graphical settings in order to enhance the visual fidelity of critical targets.
This is pretty much Evilagram.MichaelJLowell wrote:Right now, I would think most of you agree that the content on this web site is generally disinterested in those mindsets or outright hostile to them. At the end of the day, I am "someplace in the middle", and so are the rest of you. If you think Evilagram's approach is somehow dirty or wrong, I suggest you go read TeamLiquid for a week or two. I mean, holy shit. I've seen threads asking how to train at the game, I've seen threads asking how to maintain interest in the game, and I've seen threads which are outright hostile to just about any aesthetic decision that does not "make targets clearer" or whatever. But nobody here has even gotten to close to that.
Just because TeamLiquid is worse does not make Evilagram good. The only difference is that he's sperging over more games instead of just one.MichaelJLowell wrote:The primary reason that I take offense to the use of the term "autism" to describe someone who obsesses over minute details in the videogames is that you are pretty much shitting over the entire history of good videogame design, which is the history of people obsessing over minute details in the process of programming videogames. "Oh, but those people are making the games, they're not just studying them in order to become better at them. They're doing something meaningful" Which would, of course, be an argument that "autism" is okay, so long as you're putting it towards something "valid". (Like, what, you think people didn't study games before they started making them?) Of course, if you've read the stuff on my web site, you would know my answer to that: "Who gives a crap?"
Yes those people are making games and that's hard and I respect that. Evilagram is just dissecting everything in minute detail (meaning HOW MANY FRAMES DOES THIS ACTION TAKE and whatnot) because he enjoys that because he's autistic. The only suggestion on game design I've seen from him is "MUH HEALTH PACKS". Obsessing over every little detail because you want your game to be as good as possible and obsessing over every little detail because you have autism are different things. Again if you want to obsess over something why not obsess over something more challenging and not Melee or Dark Souls etc (I'm not just speaking about games).MichaelJLowell wrote:That's been the narrative of this web site. I don't care how you spend your free time, so long as you're 1) trying to learn new things, 2) keeping an open mind, and 3) not directly harming people by choosing your lifestyle. (And don't get into any pedantic nonsense that these people are harming you by being an intellectual and moral drain on society. That would hardly be exclusive to videogames.) In the course of providing feedback for discussion on this web site, you are completely entitled to say that you disagree and why. But "I study game mechanics" is not "autism", and it's hardly a philosophy that I would reject.
Who do you think is keeping an open mind? The people who want cool and complex mechanics that go along with a beautiful looking game or the people who say "FUCK AESTHETICS, THIS GAME DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH NUMBERS IN IT"?
by icycalm » 11 Dec 2012 03:39
Dr Stefansson’s work adds to an existing body of research on the effect of paternal age. Previous studies have linked older fathers with higher rates of schizophrenia and autism in their offspring. In April three teams of researchers identified specific mutations that increase the chance of autism; all three observed that the risk of such mutations in a child rose with his father’s age at conception.
by icycalm » 15 Dec 2012 09:37
A troubled 20-year-old loner with a history of autistic behavior is the monster behind a horrific shooting at a Connecticut elementary school that left 26 people, including 20 children, dead on on Friday. After missing on the 21st child and having to reload, witnesses heard the youth mumble under his breath, "Darn, I broke my chain, time for a restart!", and shoot himself in the head.
by icycalm » 21 Feb 2013 03:58
Anonymous wrote:I had never been to system11 much until recently, but I started browsing around there more after reading icycalm's article on why playing for score is shit and it was pretty amusing how those people fall right into the categories he talks about. Really a shitty place.
by ksevcov » 21 Mar 2013 06:45
The gunman responsible for the Sandy Hook school shooting was so obsessed with video games, that he created a score sheet filled with the names of past serial killers in an attempt to out-score’ them. That’s the claim of a new report by the New York Daily Times.
Investigators researching the killer’s motives are said to have found a seven foot long, four foot wide spreadsheet filled with the kill tallies of past serial killers, the site suggests.
The details on the alleged sheet suggests the shooter placed extensive research into the study, and the New York Daily Times states quite explicitly that the document was a score sheet, as backed up by an unnamed ‘law enforcement veteran’.
The anonymous source supposedly said, “We were told (the shooter) had around 500 people on this sheet. Names and the number of people killed and the weapons that were used, even the precise make and model of the weapons. It had to have taken years. It sounded like a doctoral thesis, that was the quality of the research.”
The source then continued, “They don’t believe this was just a spreadsheet. They believe it was a score sheet. This was the work of a video gamer, and that it was his intent to put his own name at the very top of that list.
by zinger » 15 Apr 2013 20:50
Hiroyuki Maruyama (G.rev) wrote:In a good shooter, you shoot, you kill the enemy and he disappears in a good explosion. Yes, that's what's good! It might seem obvious like that, but that's what a good shooter is.
by icycalm » 15 Apr 2013 23:42
by icycalm » 23 Apr 2013 22:41
Adrian Chmielarz wrote:I definitely didn't want the player to get bonuses for performing heroic - for performing actions that are actually really stupid on the battlefield. Because finishing an enemy that you can just spend one bullet on him and he's done, or doing this elaborate whatever when bullets are still firing, that's just no to me.
I wouldn't have any headshot bonuses counting towards the three-star ratings; the executions wouldn't count towards the rating; and all these things that are in a really weird way Bulletstormy - I wouldn't want Bulletstorm in Gears. It was supposed to be, in my vision, a really dark fight for survival.
The reward for the headshot was supposed to be intrinsic not extrinsic. The reward was supposed to be, because the ammo was scarce, OK I only used one bullet instead of three. That was your reward in my version.