The Great Debate on Fairness begins anew... : LUSENET : MAME Action Replay : One Thread

I find it quite a shame that a player of Mr. Gustavo's abilities has been made to feel that he is doing something suspect. If the accusers of his (or anyone else's, for that matter)can pinpoint exactly where the infractions are at in a particular inp AND be able to present a similar inp of the same game with the accuser's "default settings" to show a difference...then, we might have a case. Otherwise, it is indeed an honor system that we will have to go with here at MARP.

Yes, I'm quite sure that there have been cases here that a game has been played at framerates lower than other people have played the game at. However, there are no ways to positively detect this kind of thing at the present. To that end I say "oh, well"...

As much as I want to have numerous high scores (like many of you), I have conceded that unlevel playing fields are going to exist at times. But for the most part, I believe that most all of the players here at MARP are at least honorable enough as to not degrade the collection of fabulous feats of video game mastery that make the MARP site so much fun to observe. I have learned so much from watching you folks playing many of these games at such an incredible high level that it makes me "green with envy"!

I do have a suggestion for Chris, though. It seems that there are numerous games with no ability for proper playback. Frogs, some of the Head On games, and Safari just to mention a few. For those, I suggest that we just eliminate these games from competition until the playback issue is resolved. Yup, that will cost me some points I'm sure, but I feel that this is one of the steps necessary to avoid any future controversies. This suggestion would also apply to any recording that cannot be played back even though the game normally supports proper playback. If the inp doesn't playback, then throw it out, simple as that. If the issue of verification is to have any validity, then we must eliminate the games that have no way of being truly verified by a player's peers. I'm sorry, but a pcx can no longer hold water. I know that I have used this as a method of claim in the past, but I feel that in light of the current discussion, it can no longer be acceptable. This will curtail any future claims that certain players have "doctored" their pcx files.

As far as autofire goes, once again there is no real way to have a positive ID on this one at this time. Yes, there was a great deal of discussion when the monster Track & Field inps started floating in and everyone was trying to figure out how the meter in this game could be "pegged" without some kind of assistance...hmmm...once again, unless someone confesses or someone provides positive proof of an infraction, we go with the honor sytem until further notice whether we like it or not.

Well, I've done enough rambling for now. I'd like to hear other suggestions on the points I've addressed.


BTW- Congrats to Ken Okamoto for being the one to lock up the Japanese quiz games (qadj and cworld2j)! As predicted, the first player to understand Japanese is going to reduce the rest of us to mere rubble on these games. And then along comes Ken...

-- JoustGod (, May 14, 1999


I must admit to being guilty of being one of the ones who questioned the rate of fire demonstrated in Juan's Starforce recording.

However, taking into account his obvious expertise at both this and many other games I am willing to live by the honour system that we here seem to have at MARP and would like to see Juan put his scores back again - especially so I have something to aim for on Wonderboy !!! ;-)


PS: Juan - I still can't seem to get the timing right for stage 7-3.

-- beejay (, May 15, 1999.

First of all... I'd like to say hi to the MARP... and mention that it's a pleasure to be with all of you. :)

And now... I'd like to make my comments on the situation.

From observations of watching several games, I've determined that autofire would be very hard to detect, as many people have said before. Even if you did use it in some games, you can only fire a couple shots at a time. Ya wanna good example? Try galaxian. Autofire would only give out one shot at a time... wouldn't work too well I imagine.

Second... I'd like to talk about the speed of games. Personally, it would be virtually impossible to see if someone is playing too slow in a game. Perhaps our only hope is to have a `speed tracker` implemented into mame, so we saw what speed was used at any time. Also we need to hope for a `DIP Switch` tracker, so we can all see exactly what DIP switches were used. Hopefully, we'll have a chance to see what configuration was used before the recording begins, and any changes to the configuration any time during gameplay. Until any of those things get implemented(IF they get implemented), then the only thing I see right now is an `honor system`.

Third... I would like to agree with JoustGod that any inp that doesn't playback correctly should be removed. However, I would like to mention that this should happen only if the version claimed to be used in the recording was used to play it back. Example: If I used mame 34 beta 1 in a recording, and someone comes back saying that the recording doesn't playback, he has to mention that he used mame 34 beta 1. Perhaps we should also have a requirement that at least two people have to say this instead of one to disqualify a recording. Perhaps it would be a better idea that we should have a system where if someone said that this recording doesn't playback, it goes to an unbiased "Referee" to verify this claim. If that person says it doesn't playback, then the recording is disqualified, and would be removed from the high scores list.

These are just a couple thoughts of mine, and a couple suggestions if you wanna take them. Again... nice to be with all of you, and thank you for reading this post. :)

-- Gameboy9 (, May 15, 1999.

autofires are SO OBVIOUS to spot...

either all shots are shot in like a few frames....yeah...lets see you push a fire button 60 times a second then ? no ? how about 6-8 times in 1/3 second...well...there you have it...autofires spotted... however...this also occurs if games are played at low the game is doing (say) 50%...thats 30 now have the chance to double your firing speed

autofires also spotted when player shoots close to an unkillable object or edge of screen...obscenely fast amount of shots...uhuh...also a instant spot

i will gladly point out Juans 1943 looks as suspect as may not be, but i dont know that, and from what i have seen and know with autofires (i DONT have one ^_^) it certainly looks like it to can read my ranting on this in previous messages...surely they are still here...

i am VERY suspect about those track and field (?) where it goes out of the bar...riiiiight...what kind of device are they playing this on ? arcade...nup...not even that you could make it go out of the meter... how about a altenator hooked up to a autofire ? hell yeah...sync to 30 or 60 fps and whammo...kill!

i used to make autofires for my amiga :) so ive experimented alot here...i wouldnt make one for my pc for a few reasons...

also for all you...i use arcade parts, 2 button and stick with button on top (same as b1/fire) autos...i made it digital but still running from the analogue system :) a few resistors here and there and DIGITAL is back!

i am gonna make a full on arcade like DECK so i can play more authentically...when will mame add at random "faulty button" or "dodgy direction" features ??? or the eat the credit :) damn, thats all i need!

enough of my rantings too...

-- Krool. (, May 16, 1999.

On the subject of bad .inps...

Why doesn't MARP just stop accepting scores done on beta versions of MAME altogether? All of the duff inp's seem to have been recorded on betas. This would at least help the problem a bit. The reason is they don't even work from one beta to the next most of the time. If we only accepted final release recording at least it would be easier from ppl to verify scores. Is anyone really going to download another 2 meg beta version of MAME just to take a look some ancient hi- score?

When the older beta's are no longer available ppl could just upload anything whether it worked or not or maybe wasn't even a valid recording and claim the 10 pts. Maybe that's what's happening anyway? Recorded on a beta which is no longer available there'd be no way to confirm or deny it.

Surely there's enough games on MAME that players can wait until the final version before submitting scores?

-- Octavian (, May 16, 1999.

hello I understand that it is a lot of space in disk, at the moment 100 megas, to have all the versions mame and mame32 but if a game was waiting for it, and you have wanted to play it for a long time. and this she/he appears in the beta 1. It is difficult to wait until the stable version to play it, they can spend more than two months. on the other hand this the problem of the roms that passed of a version to other, they change and they no longer work. and some recorded games are the stable version .33, they no longer work more with that stable version .33 and the problem that you can not store the roms if the original game is not possessed an entire topic I wait to that wonder boy monster land is stable, as 4 months, but the sound continues without working well, and tired it records it same.

-- JGustavo (, May 16, 1999.

I agree with Juan. I think that it is just not practical to wait for the next "final" release of MAME to submit an inp. However, there was a suggestion a while back on this very subject. The solution to standardize our recordings is for each player to playback his inps from a beta cycle with the final version of that cycle to confirm that they do play on that final version. Thus, he could now have a good portion of his scores now falling under just one version of MAME. This is a very large project for some of us (cough,cough)and hopefully I can personally get around to cleaning up my own group of inps!


-- JoustGod (, May 17, 1999.

I know I am new to MARP, but I do know a few things. One, there has to be some way to identify the recording when it comes in, if it works when it first comes in on whatever version it was recorded from, then we know it's a valid claim, irreguardless of whether or not it is able to be viewed at a date in the future. If it can't be viewed when checked ASAP, then make them prove it or toss. But to go back to recording that were there a long time back and saying that now since it isn't watchable were going to throw it out is rediculous. My $0.025 cents worth.

-- Chris Parsley (, June 05, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ