YOU DECIDE....the integrity of the HSC

[Jinks]

I made 147k on my last house and was mort free at age 33.. I know 2008 house prices skyrocketed.. So sound similar there as to here..

[Atarifever]

Oh sorry. We never had a recession here either and are a have province as well. I live in Sask. and dont think east is part of Canada as Que. is full of whiney(insert swear here) people.

Just when I visit my bro in Calgary his neighbours are all newfies... And you have to give them credit to go for the money. People in Ontario ask for handouts and sit on welfare while we import people from all over the world to work.

Heh heh. There are a lot of us up there for sure, but we actually saw some population growth lately, so they're arriving faster than leaving for the first time in my life.

 

I'm well aware of what's going on up your way. I love this shifting Canadian economy. I had a friend from up in Sask, and she always said the only two places she could ever live were there and here. She said the people were the same. I don't know about that, but as a huge CFL fan (probably the only one in Newfoundland), Saskatchewan is mecca to me (although I'm a Ti-cat fan).

 

I now return everyone to your regularly scheduled, non-Canadian specific, thread.

[Schizophretard]

I forget exactly, but I seem to recall it was something like the game mechanics made it literally impossible to progress without cheating. Kind of like the first RC Pro-Am for the NES, the computer cars are set to literally beat you without question after a certain point. Also, he admitted in private discussions to using cheats to "practice" and was incredibly well-versed on how they can be applied to basically every game. So versed it's clear he knew how to use them, and has been using them, probably almost every time.

 

When I was play testing for RT's Seaweed Assault, he finely tuned it to get insanely difficult while still being possible to master and play potentially forever. I believe his original idea was to always increase the difficulty to the point that no man or machine could survive. Is it impossible in that sense or just so improbable that it might as well be considered impossible?

[LidLikesIntellivision]

When I was play testing for RT's Seaweed Assault, he finely tuned it to get insanely difficult while still being possible to master and play potentially forever. I believe his original idea was to always increase the difficulty to the point that no man or machine could survive. Is it impossible in that sense or just so improbable that it might as well be considered impossible?

The second one. A machine would certainly survive...

But there's a little more to the improbability of any man surviving last levels, the score was too high in a way that requires not only surviving but also playing really great to make those points.

[Schizophretard]

The second one. A machine would certainly survive...

But there's a little more to the improbability of any man surviving last levels, the score was too high in a way that requires not only surviving but also playing really great to make those points.

 

So, if someone was a really great player, the joystick could be moved to achieve those points?

[LidLikesIntellivision]

So, if someone was a really great player, the joystick could be moved to achieve those points?

The joystick can be moved to achieve those points, as far as I know.

But it seems there isn't that really great player so the condition may not be achieved by humans.

 

That made all things more difficult. Oyama's video and message saying it's impossible was the final confession and a relief because it was hard to make an absolute evidence of cheating.

I tried many things to know what happened, inclusive playing with unlimited lives and only that way I could roll the score. Some great players tried the game too.

[Schizophretard]

The joystick can be moved to achieve those points, as far as I know.

But it seems there isn't that really great player so the condition may not be achieved by humans.

 

That made all things more difficult. Oyama's video and message saying it's impossible was the final confession and a relief because it was hard to make an absolute evidence of cheating.

I tried many things to know what happened, inclusive playing with unlimited lives and only that way I could roll the score. Some great players tried the game too.

 

But if the possibilities were either cheating or a really great player then what was the evidence that cheating was more likely before the other evidence came to light?

[Atarifever]

Ignore. I misunderstood something.

Edited February 11, 2013 by Atarifever

[LidLikesIntellivision]

But if the possibilities were either cheating or a really great player then what was the evidence that cheating was more likely before the other evidence came to light?

Experienced players who knew the game and the limits a great player couldn't break.

I guess it can be compared with great racing drivers in normal cars seeing someone racing with an electronic assisted throttle, ABS etc. You know when it's not feasible by humans even when there's no physics law forbiding.

 

EDIT--

A really (in reality) great player wasn't the possibility. So only cheating remained as the possibility but, as I said, it wasn't something everyone could see at first glance.

[Stan]

But if the possibilities were either cheating or a really great player then what was the evidence that cheating was more likely before the other evidence came to light?

 

You keep questioning this, are you......oyama?!!! Fact is, he finally admitted to cheating, so that's all we needed. The suspicion was there, he eventually verified it and now his 2600 scores have, thus far, been pathetic without his apparent and prior cheating.

[NIKON]

I was the one who started all this stuff with oyama's desert falcon score...many, many,many,many,many,many pleads were given to provide us with some proof that we were wrong about the score. Even a video that would come somewhat close to a rollage score...all we got was side stepping, non topic reteric...then finally a video of stage 1 of the game which is the easiest stage in the game...and it was clear evidence of point pushing abuse and then was suddenly cut off at the beginning of stage 2 with a score of around 169K. logically if all the stages were like stage 1 then he would have to go through six stages to achieve a rollage score. but in reality the game does not repeat stage 1. the levels become longer and more difficult to the point that it is impossible to complete a stage. At this point one must play the game to see what I am saying.

 

There has been a decision made...consequences have been administered..point has been made... honor is restored...case closed.

[Schizophretard]

You keep questioning this, are you......oyama?!!! Fact is, he finally admitted to cheating, so that's all we needed. The suspicion was there, he eventually verified it and now his 2600 scores have, thus far, been pathetic without his apparent and prior cheating.

 

No. I'm questioning it because I'm not oyama. If I were oyama then I would already know the answers. I'm just trying to get a clear picture of the situation and to figure out how one figures out someone is cheating based on a score. The only thing I can think of is a maximum possible score is known and a score higher than that is posted. But if that were the case then the maximum score would have been posted in the opening post for Desert Falcon for bonus points but instead it says,"Set a new HSC record for [+1] point". I'm not saying oyama didn't cheat. I'm just curious about what about the score was suspicious prior to knowing that cheating took place. If a maximum score isn't known then it seems like any score is potentially possible.

 

Here is an example:

 

During the Seaweed Assault competition most of the scores were under 10,000 points. In the thread Liduario said,"My score (4,680) seems to be a good one but schizophretard mentioned a huge score of 75k I wonder if that score is a super Easter Egg effect by RT..." He eventually won with a score of 80,340 but at first he didn't see how it was possible. If Liduario, Spiceware, and RevEng didn't post scores higher than 10,000 points then I could see people accusing me of cheating and putting the burden of proof on me to prove my innocence. I'm just wondering if something like that took place.

[Gorfy]

No. I'm questioning it because I'm not oyama. If I were oyama then I would already know the answers. I'm just trying to get a clear picture of the situation and to figure out how one figures out someone is cheating based on a score. The only thing I can think of is a maximum possible score is known and a score higher than that is posted. But if that were the case then the maximum score would have been posted in the opening post for Desert Falcon for bonus points but instead it says,"Set a new HSC record for [+1] point". I'm not saying oyama didn't cheat. I'm just curious about what about the score was suspicious prior to knowing that cheating took place. If a maximum score isn't known then it seems like any score is potentially possible.

 

Here is an example:

 

During the Seaweed Assault competition most of the scores were under 10,000 points. In the thread Liduario said,"My score (4,680) seems to be a good one but schizophretard mentioned a huge score of 75k I wonder if that score is a super Easter Egg effect by RT..." He eventually won with a score of 80,340 but at first he didn't see how it was possible. If Liduario, Spiceware, and RevEng didn't post scores higher than 10,000 points then I could see people accusing me of cheating and putting the burden of proof on me to prove my innocence. I'm just wondering if something like that took place.

 

Initially I was concerned about the very same thing. That's the reason I originally defended Oyama both publicly and in private PM threads. But eventually the preponderance of evidence was sufficient to convince me and some others that Oyama was using cheats. He essentially admitted to it for one thing. His vast, detailed knowledge of cheating mechanisms did not help his case either. Then he declared that he didn't like sport games and was only going to post a participation point, but a few days later he posted a near perfect score in Ice Hockey. In his video, he was not able to replicate these results, but came close enough that the decision was made that he would not be banned. However, he would be required to post videos of his gameplay in the future. Since that time, his posted scores have been markedly lower than before the video requirement.

 

Obviously, we do not have formal court procedures for such circumstances, so things can seem a little fuzzy. But if you were to follow all the threads and PM's regarding this matter, then you would see that something like "due process" had been observed.

[Schizophretard]

Initially I was concerned about the very same thing. That's the reason I originally defended Oyama both publicly and in private PM threads. But eventually the preponderance of evidence was sufficient to convince me and some others that Oyama was using cheats. He essentially admitted to it for one thing. His vast, detailed knowledge of cheating mechanisms did not help his case either. Then he declared that he didn't like sport games and was only going to post a participation point, but a few days later he posted a near perfect score in Ice Hockey. In his video, he was not able to replicate these results, but came close enough that the decision was made that he would not be banned. However, he would be required to post videos of his gameplay in the future. Since that time, his posted scores have been markedly lower than before the video requirement.

 

Obviously, we do not have formal court procedures for such circumstances, so things can seem a little fuzzy. But if you were to follow all the threads and PM's regarding this matter, then you would see that something like "due process" had been observed.

 

What would have happened if none of this evidence existed other than his score? Would he be required to prove his score?

 

How long does he have to post videos for?

[Gorfy]

In my opinion, nothing should've happened in the absence of the other evidence. I don't think anybody should have to prove a score (i.e. via video) just because it is far superior.

 

I think he's required to post videos indefinitely, but that's up to the moderators.

[NIKON]

So what is being said here is that no one should have to prove their score no matter what??

 

For arguments sake lets just say that screenshots were not accepted here at AA....all score submissions would be write in only......

 

1. Desert Falcon - 2,456,990

2. Food Fight - 4,678,450

3. Asteroids - 6,998,560

 

how would anyone react to that?

 

edit.....BTW I did not really play those games...just wrote in the score

Edited February 12, 2013 by NIKON

[Stan]

What would have happened if none of this evidence existed other than his score? Would he be required to prove his score?

 

How long does he have to post videos for?

 

He admitted to cheating, he claimed he used it to "practice" on other games but essentially admitted to cheating in them too. Now that he knows how to make videos of his gameplay, which is actually quite easy, it's not a big deal if he does it. I think if he shows that enough of his scores are legit with videos, he'll eventually not have to do them anymore, but so far he's only proven it further by the fact that his last two submitted scores were on the completely opposite end of the spectrum. He couldn't even pull an average score in Wabbit. Coming from a guy who was constantly breaking records triple of verified scores on sites like Twin Galaxies, you'd think he'd be able to do it all of the time. Or, further, you'd think he would have proven himself on Twin Galaxies. I'm not sure what you're not getting here or why you keep asking questions. It was simple, he posted a score that would have been impossible without cheating. NIKON called him out on it and then made a video to verify why it wouldn't be possible to do based on how the game increases in difficulty naturally. Oyama then played this fine little game of responding with absolute nonsense half of the time, posted some scores like we forgot about it (which were deleted by the mod), sort of admitting to cheating, and then finally did admit to cheating, which by proxy means he probably cheated at least 70% of the time before, if not 100%. That's it, there's nothing more to say.

Edited February 12, 2013 by Stan

[Gorfy]

So what is being said here is that no one should have to prove their score no matter what??

 

For arguments sake lets just say that screenshots were not accepted here at AA....all score submissions would be write in only......

 

1. Desert Falcon - 2,456,990

2. Food Fight - 4,678,450

3. Asteroids - 6,998,560

 

how would anyone react to that?

 

edit.....BTW I did not really play those games...just wrote in the score

 

No, I'm not saying that nobody should have to prove their scores no matter what. I was simply stating that it is unreasonable to expect proof for a single score just because it is noticeably higher than everyone else's. If there is a pattern of questionable scores and/or other evidence of cheating, as in Oyama's case, then video proof should be required. Alternatively, require everyone to post videos so as not to single out individuals in what may seem to be an arbitrary manner. The latter is less appealing to me, but I'd be willing to go along with it if there's reason to believe cheating is a more widespread problem than just Oyama.

[NIKON]

No, I'm not saying that nobody should have to prove their scores no matter what. I was simply stating that it is unreasonable to expect proof for a single score just because it is noticeably higher than everyone else's. If there is a pattern of questionable scores and/or other evidence of cheating, as in Oyama's case, then video proof should be required. Alternatively, require everyone to post videos so as not to single out individuals in what may seem to be an arbitrary manner. The latter is less appealing to me, but I'd be willing to go along with it if there's reason to believe cheating is a more widespread problem than just Oyama.

 

So far from what i have seen... that is not the case...the reason for video validation is to see if oyama possesses the skills required to achieve the scores he has been submitting. So far from what I have seen and only based on the videos he has submitted..he does not have those skills.

 

We will have to wait and see in season 6 of the 7800 HSC to see if his skills match his scores.

 

I have stated that I am going to do the same thing...but for games that are extensive in time..a .inp file will be submitted from MESS and you will need MESS to see it. Only because uploading videos to you tube is a long waiting period.

 

If we see that we can again trust Oyama then we may not need to see video proof of his scores.

 

****************************************************************************************************************************

 

To answer the question of Schitzophretard...You would have to play Desert Falcon and understand the game and scoring mechanics of this game on the settings that the mod stated in order to completely understand where this is all coming from. Since I do not know you I am assuming , based on your posts, that you have not played Desert Falcon to the extent that I have.

Rolling the score under the conditions set forth and abiding by the rules of the HSC.. is impossible without point pushing or point scumming if you prefer that name. yes there are times that one has to sit and shoot until there is a clear space to move..but to blatenly sit there and rack up points just for the sake of points is not in the spirit of the HSC and is against the rules of the HSC.

[Schizophretard]

To answer the question of Schitzophretard...You would have to play Desert Falcon and understand the game and scoring mechanics of this game on the settings that the mod stated in order to completely understand where this is all coming from. Since I do not know you I am assuming , based on your posts, that you have not played Desert Falcon to the extent that I have.

Rolling the score under the conditions set forth and abiding by the rules of the HSC.. is impossible without point pushing or point scumming if you prefer that name. yes there are times that one has to sit and shoot until there is a clear space to move..but to blatenly sit there and rack up points just for the sake of points is not in the spirit of the HSC and is against the rules of the HSC.

 

You are correct that I haven't played Desert Falcon to the extent that you have. I have played it but not to the extent that I know everything about it. Can you explain more because I'm kind of confused now? I thought what oyama did was make himself invincible by using save states which would be breaking this rule:

 

Rule #5. Do not use any cheat/hack options. These include auto-fire, unlimited lives, invinciblity, etc. Also no continues. Only games started at the beginning count.

 

But it sounds like you are saying he broke this rule:

 

Rule #6. Please do not abuse bugs in the games!

Many Atari games have loopholes that allow you to easily get huge amounts of points without much work

(An example of such "point scumming" in Asteroids, you can eliminate all but one small asteroid,

and then "hunt" UFO's without the level ending), or finish the game while skipping alot of the actual

content. Not only do these result in somewhat bogus high scores, but it ruins the fun and challenge of the game in the process.

I'll try to point out "forbidden" tactics as i become aware of them,

but if you happen to stumble across one that i was not aware of, please let me know!

(Note: If a bug is proven to exist partway through the contest, existing scores may be removed if it can be proven that they have exploited the bug even if it was not intentional. If you have triggered the bug accidentally,

i would urge you to voluntarily remove your score and post a new one.)

 

If he did some kind of point scumming tactic then he did cheat but that only makes sense if a score roll is possible without that tactic. If that tactic is the only possible way to roll the score then it isn't exploiting a bug but using the only strategy the game allows for a score roll. Rule #7 begins like this:

 

Rolled The Score, Once someone gets good enough at a particular game, it's entirely possible

for them to play (for all intensive purposes) forever!

 

If oyama used the only strategy the game allows to potentially play forever and without it's use it is impossible to roll the score then I would say he didn't cheat because according to rule number 7 getting good enough at a game results in a score roll. Whatever tactic he used to roll the score couldn't be considered point scumming if that is the only tactic the programmer allowed for a score roll. For it to be point scumming it would have to be possible to roll the score without it. If he used save states and hacks or something like that then he cheated but if he did something that was possible on a console and is the only way to roll a score then I would consider that getting good enough at a game. It would be more like memorizing patterns in PAC-MAN instead of being like the Asteroids point scumming example.

 

What exactly did oyama do?

[Gorfy]

Oyama broke Rule #5 and possibly #6, although I agree with you (Schizophretard) that it is highly unclear what would constitute point scumming on this particular game, Desert Falcon. It seems reasonable to me to sit and shoot as a strategy for playing this game. I used this technique in a previous 7800 season to get my high score on Desert Falcon, so if Oyama's guilty of breaking rule #6, then so am I.

[Atarifever]

I got ten thousand sexdecillion (a googol, but I like that name better) in Bob's Space Invaders.

[NIKON]

Let me try to make this as clear as possible as to alleviate any doubt.

 

First..I stated "based on the videos that he has submitted so far he does not have those skills" .. this means that from what I have seen oyama could not have obtained his score in a legit manner. Did he use another form of a cheat such as hex manipulation? unknown due to not having access to his computer...Did he use a program called cheat o matic for unlimited lives and point value manipulation? again unknown. due to not having access to his computer. did he use save states...again unknown

 

So what can one say about this you ask?...let me explain

 

Desert Falcon is an original non ported game that Atari put on the 2600, 7800, A8 systems. It is a 3/4 static scrolling design.(meaning the scroll is done via player movement not programmed like say Zaxxon)

 

Their are point values set to each enemy object..(see manual http://www.atariage....reLabelID=683 )

 

 

Then there is a Base treasure value (see #1 in pic) that starts at 50 and depending on the enemy that is hit, will increase in value..this maxes out at 999 then rolls over to 1K and continues onto 999 again at which point it becomes 2K..and so on and so on. This is what each treasure is worth at the bonus round which you enter after killing the Sphinx.

 

#2 in the pic is pointing to the Base value multipliers ...there are three...one for each treasure...every time the player picks up a corresponding treasure that number for that treasure increases by 1 which maxes out at 9 without any roll over. However if the player shoots one of the treasures then that treasures count reverts back to 1.

 

After killing the Sphinx at the end of a level the player enters a timed bonus stage which the default is 20 seconds of game time not real time. there is a way to increase that time to 30 seconds..please see manual for explanation of hieroglyphs.

 

in the bonus stage there are no enemies and you cannot lose lives by hitting structures...although you do go through the animation.. you do not lose a life.

 

Scenario: A player goes through a level and shoots numerous enemies and his base treasure value is 1590 and his multipliers read 2 - 3 - 4. the bonus would breakdown like this if the player only picked up just 1 of each treasure:

 

Base Value: 1590

 

Treasure 1 = 1590 x 2 = 3,180 points

 

Treasure 2 = 1590 x 3 = 4,770 points

 

Treasure 3 = 1590 x 4 = 6,360 points

 

Total = 14,310 points

 

The bonus points are then added to your current score at the beginning of the next level.

 

Yes I did state that there are times with this game that one must sit and wait for an opening to move forward...but this does not take long.

 

As the player moves up in levels the enemies become more aggressive and numerous as well as the level get longer and longer.

 

the video that oyama submitted of stage 1 of him playing Desert Falcon shows a direct violation of point scumming..as well as only having 2 lives remaining at the end of level 1 which is the easiest level of any setting.

the likelihood of him making it through level 2 is unlikely.

 

Sooo this leaves little to have as evidence in his favor in that given the video ..he did not display the skills required to roll the score on this game without violating HSC rules of play.

 

As far as we are able to ascertain through video evidence and a confession made by Oyama he violated rule 5 and 6.

 

This game is programmed to beat the player...point blank period. There comes a point where it is impossible to stay alive...this point for me is stage 3..I am not saying that I am a pro..but I know this game and its mechanics.

 

I cannot explain this in any other way. I hope this clears it up for you

[roadrunner]

oyama,

in this video you made of Midnight Mutants, shouldn't you have died at the 6:59 mark?

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGXwLLC8p70

[Schizophretard]

Sooo this leaves little to have as evidence in his favor in that given the video ..he did not display the skills required to roll the score on this game without violating HSC rules of play.

 

As far as we are able to ascertain through video evidence and a confession made by Oyama he violated rule 5 and 6.

 

This game is programmed to beat the player...point blank period. There comes a point where it is impossible to stay alive...this point for me is stage 3..I am not saying that I am a pro..but I know this game and its mechanics.

 

I cannot explain this in any other way. I hope this clears it up for you

 

A game that has a score roll over programmed into it and also the inability to reach that roll over sounds like a major design flaw. It's like if the bug in Impossible Mission that makes beating it impossible was intentional. A game that is programmed to beat the player is the game cheating. I don't see how using the only method the game allows to beat it could be cheating.

 

I watched oyama's video and I don't see anything in it that I would consider cheating. It looks like he is playing defensively instead of offensively. If the scroll is controlled by the player then you can sit and wait as long as you want or move forward as quickly as you want. If that freedom of control wasn't meant to be used then why is it there and why wasn't it programmed like Zaxxon or have a timer like Super Mario Bros.? I don't see how it could be cheating to use a sitting and waiting defensive strategy instead of a moving forward as quickly as possible offensive strategy. The same with flying and walking. You can fly and walk as much as you want. Part of oyama's defensive strategy is in the manual,"Duck behind pyramids and obelisks to save yourself and lure enemies into crashing." I think interpreting rule #6 to mean that you are not allowed to use the only strategy possible to beat the game and you must allow the game to beat you is too strict of an interpretation. It isn't using an easy method to roll the score. It is using the only method to roll the score. I can understand how he broke rule #5 but I don't get how he broke #6.

 

Below is Classic Game Room's Review. In it he describes something similar to oyama's method of playing: "I love the fact that you can land your bird and hop along the ground like a pigeon and shoot things. In fact, I found that to be the most effective way to rid the screen of enemies. Because while this game is not terrible, it's actually a very interesting game. It's extremely difficult to tell how far off the ground the enemies are when they are coming at you. In Zaxxon I never really had that problem. In this game you're shooting at something, you think you are going to hit it, and then it just flies right into you. So, leveling the playing field bringing everything onto the ground into a two dimensional environment kinda helped. Also, it eliminated the problem of flying into stuff because if your bird touches anything it dies." That makes sense to me and combining that with what oyama was trying to show could be a clip from How To Beat Home Video Games. The strict interpretation of rule #6 is more like How To Get Beat By Home Video Games.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQwPnLYcVh4