Vaz - dsaber -32040

Discussion of playback questions / problems. Any recording where people have playback problems should appear here.

Moderator: Chad

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Fri Apr 14, 2017 5:44 am

BeeJay wrote:1.Until such time as we have three people that confirm it only plays back to that score, yes.
2. No, you simply asked "What is antagonising?" and I answered that question
3. There's only 1 thread where you asked if the manual scan was for the arcade version of the game.
4. Yes, many people report problems with playbacks, and that is fine. What is not fine is repeatedly asking why nothing has been done yet
5. given that this site is run by volunteers..........................I, and probably others, will start ignoring those type of posts from you.
6. I don't assume who's older or more experienced as I have no idea of your age or the amount of life and/or gaming experience you have
7. So why are you so unwilling to accept the evidence presented to you that Pacmania difficulty C is in fact harder than difficulty B.


1. If 3 people cannot play the claimed score, what happens? The claimed score remains?
2. As said I asked what is antagonising in my posts in your point of view, not what is the word in general. For the words I don't know I use the dictionary.
3. Don't even know what is "manual scan". And why this manual scan should be conneted with Pacmania.
4. Kale for examble asked more than once for a specific score of "hpuncher" to be deleted, I didn't hear you to blame him.
5. Players are volunteers too.......................... its a good idea "you and probably others" ignore me because I have no time to waste in forum. Point is mods to care about such problems if they want a fair competition.
6. 46, what about you? Experience is not only gaming.
7. It's better to discuss about Pacmania in Pacmania's thread. What makes you think that I'm unwilling? Check latest post by Despatche, he's not sure which rank is more difficult. But you're sure? Did you try the game? Have you ever played it?
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby mahlemiut » Fri Apr 14, 2017 6:09 am

PP. wrote:3. Don't even know what is "manual scan". And why this manual scan should be conneted with Pacmania.


You forgot about the scan of the Pacmania manual already? :roll:
- Barry Rodewald
MARP Assistant Web Maintainer
Image
User avatar
mahlemiut
Editor
 
Posts: 4106
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2002 10:05 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Fri Apr 14, 2017 7:17 am

mahlemiut wrote:You forgot about the scan of the Pacmania manual already? :roll:


I wouldn't if it was written in Pacmania's thread:-)
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby Despatche » Fri Apr 14, 2017 7:32 am

On topic since it's another Namco game, I'm curious if different publishers put different recommended settings in the manual. Sometimes that happens, especially with US export releases. I figure most of these later Namco games just translate the original and ship that, but who knows with certain titles?
Despatche
Button Masher
Button Masher
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:25 pm

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby mahlemiut » Fri Apr 14, 2017 8:33 am

That's certainly possible, especially with games that use DIP switches. Games that store settings in NVRAM, though, set their own defaults usually (or have an option to do so), and can still differ between regions.
- Barry Rodewald
MARP Assistant Web Maintainer
Image
User avatar
mahlemiut
Editor
 
Posts: 4106
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2002 10:05 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Fri Apr 14, 2017 8:05 pm

PP. wrote:1. If 3 people cannot play the claimed score, what happens? The claimed score remains?
2. As said I asked what is antagonising in my posts in your point of view, not what is the word in general. For the words I don't know I use the dictionary.
3. Don't even know what is "manual scan". And why this manual scan should be conneted with Pacmania.
4. Kale for examble asked more than once for a specific score of "hpuncher" to be deleted, I didn't hear you to blame him.
5. Players are volunteers too.......................... its a good idea "you and probably others" ignore me because I have no time to waste in forum. Point is mods to care about such problems if they want a fair competition.
6. 46, what about you? Experience is not only gaming.
7. It's better to discuss about Pacmania in Pacmania's thread. What makes you think that I'm unwilling? Check latest post by Despatche, he's not sure which rank is more difficult. But you're sure? Did you try the game? Have you ever played it?

1. Already answered in this thread.
2. Already answered in this thread.
3. A scan of the manual for the game. It was used here as an example only.
4. One score on one game does not a pattern establish.
5. Already answered in this thread.
6. That makes you younger than me.
7. But I wasn't trying to discuss Pacmania here, I was using that as an example because you so often want examples, proofs, etc.
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:11 am

BeeJay wrote:1. Already answered in this thread.
2. Already answered in this thread.
3. A scan of the manual for the game. It was used here as an example only.
4. One score on one game does not a pattern establish.
5. Already answered in this thread.
6. That makes you younger than me.
7. But I wasn't trying to discuss Pacmania here, I was using that as an example because you so often want examples, proofs, etc.


1. By who? I asked your opinion
2. There was no question to be answered. You just had a misunderstanding
3. As examble of what?
4. It was just an examble
5. Did you see any question in my prev.5?
6. I just ask you how old are you, is it a secret? However you speak like someone too young
7. Try to give proofs and exambles exactly when/where they ask for them
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:24 pm

PP. wrote:1. By who? I asked your opinion
2. There was no question to be answered. You just had a misunderstanding
3. As examble of what?
4. It was just an examble
5. Did you see any question in my prev.5?
6. I just ask you how old are you, is it a secret? However you speak like someone too young
7. Try to give proofs and exambles exactly when/where they ask for them

1. By me, and I'm not going to repeat it yet again.
2. No, you wrote an ambiguous question. I didn't misunderstand anything.
3. Review this topic and it will become obvious of what it was an example.
4. Yes, but not an example of someone going on and on about multiple game's scores.
5. I was merely pointing out that the following statement from your point 5 has already been answered previously - that is they do care: "Point is mods to care about such problems if they want a fair competition."
6. What exactly in my posts is like someone young? I use well constructed English sentences, in a style that is no longer taught and/or used by younger people, especially the txt/sms generation. No, it is not a secret but I try not to reveal too much about myself on public internet sites for reasons of identity security. Suffice to say I'm from the tail end of the baby boomer generation and/or the very beginning of Gen-X, depending on which start/end points you use for the generations and because the generation periods overlap.
7. I was pre-empting your question.
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:26 am

BeeJay wrote:1. By me, and I'm not going to repeat it yet again.
2. No, you wrote an ambiguous question. I didn't misunderstand anything.
3. Review this topic and it will become obvious of what it was an example.
4. Yes, but not an example of someone going on and on about multiple game's scores.
5. I was merely pointing out that the following statement from your point 5 has already been answered previously
6. What exactly in my posts is like someone young?
7. I was pre-empting your question.


1. You haven't answered, you only talked about a smaller score which was not the claimed one.
2. This is what you thought, but you were wrong. Don't try to change the meaning of my words.
3. I know already, it was an examble of nonsense. You were wrong again.
4. It was an examble which answers to your claims against me.
5. My prev.5 was an answer to your 5.
6. For examble, check your current no2. Childish attitude.
7. Which one?
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:37 pm

PP. wrote:1. You haven't answered, you only talked about a smaller score which was not the claimed one.
2. This is what you thought, but you were wrong. Don't try to change the meaning of my words.
3. I know already, it was an examble of nonsense. You were wrong again.
4. It was an examble which answers to your claims against me.
5. My prev.5 was an answer to your 5.
6. For examble, check your current no2. Childish attitude.
7. Which one?

1. If you read my answers, you would see that I have stated twice that if three people cannot play the game back at all then it gets zeroed. If two people get the same, smaller score, then it will be reduced to that score once a 3rd person also gets that same score. In other words, you can't use 2 x people getting a smaller score and then some that can't play it back at all to reduce it to that smaller score.
2. No, you wrote a question that consisted solely of the three words "What is antoganistic". I took that, combined with English being a 2nd language for you, to mean that you didn't understand the meaning of that word. In other words, it was reasonable given your wording and non-native English for me to take it that the question meant exactly what was written. In other words, it was not 'wrong' to take this as being the intent of your question and telling someone they're wrong in taking a perfectly logical meaning to a question is another example of what started me off on this whole thread.
3. So if we say you're wrong, you come back immediately with it's your opinion so it can't be wrong, but you're quite happy to accuse others of being wrong. Twice in two points. Clearly your rules apply only to you (sic) - and in case you have conveniently 'forgotten' this already, I'm directly quoting you with that rules statement.
4. No, it doesn't because what I brought up was people complaining multiple times about multiple recordings where they've raised issues about those recordings not yet being dealt to. In particular, complaining only a short time after pointing out an issue with a recording for a game.
5. No, your prev 5 was suggesting that there was no question. There doesn't have to be a question for me to provide you with a response.
6. It is not a childish attitude to answer the question you asked. Claiming that I'm trying to change the meaning of your words, when all I'm doing is quoting exactly what you wrote, is not exactly helpful. If you want to avoid this in future, don't make your question so ambiguous.
7. The one you would have asked had I not provided an example up front. The one you always ask, which is for 'proof' or 'examples' when people are discussing with you and happen to disagree with your suppositions.
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Wed Apr 19, 2017 2:26 pm

BeeJay wrote:1. (a)If you read my answers, you would see that I have stated twice that if three people cannot play the game back at all then it gets zeroed. (b) If two people get the same, smaller score, then it will be reduced to that score once a 3rd person also gets that same score.
2. No, you wrote a question that consisted solely of the three words "What is antoganistic". I took that.........
3. So if we say you're wrong, you come back immediately with it's your opinion so it can't be wrong, but you're quite happy to accuse others of being wrong. Twice in two points. Clearly your rules apply only to you (sic) - and in case you have conveniently 'forgotten' this already, I'm directly quoting you with that rules statement.
4. No, it doesn't because what I brought up was people complaining multiple times about multiple recordings where they've raised issues about those recordings not yet being dealt to. In particular, complaining only a short time after pointing out an issue with a recording for a game.
5. No, your prev 5 was suggesting that there was no question. There doesn't have to be a question for me to provide you with a response.
6. (a)It is not a childish attitude to answer the question you asked (b)If you want to avoid this in future, don't make your question so ambiguous.
7. The one you would have asked.......


1. (a) that was the situation, but score was not zeroed (b) if the 3rd person never come? we'll keep the fake score until someone comes?
2. You took that wrong.
3. You are confused, you jumped to another subject.
4. Keep the point: I just report problems as anyobody other does too.
5. As I said, my prev-prev5 was answer to your prev-prev5.
6. (a)Its childish to try all the time change the meaning of my words (b) if something is ambiguous to you then ask for additional explanation instead of distort it.
7. I would??
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Wed Apr 19, 2017 5:12 pm

PP. wrote:1. (a) that was the situation, but score was not zeroed (b) if the 3rd person never come? we'll keep the fake score until someone comes?
2. You took that wrong.
3. You are confused, you jumped to another subject.
4. Keep the point: I just report problems as anyobody other does too.
5. As I said, my prev-prev5 was answer to your prev-prev5.
6. (a)Its childish to try all the time change the meaning of my words (b) if something is ambiguous to you then ask for additional explanation instead of distort it.
7. I would??

1. No, you couldn't play it back and the 2nd person to try could, to a reduced score. That means it's no longer up for zeroing so a) is out of the mix at that point. Even with two people getting the same reduced score, yes it takes a 3rd at that same score before we can reduce the score. In other words, as I've already told you twice previously in this topic once some people can successfully play it back to a reduced score, we can't zero it because other people can't play it back at all.
2. No I did not take it wrong I took it to mean exactly what was written. You simply wrote your question wrong. But don't worry about it, that happens to all of us from time to time.
3. No, you told me I was wrong twice in a row so I was responding to that, just the same as you claim to be responding to 'attacks' from other people when you change tack.
4. No, you went on about scores that had only recently been reported, on some less than stellar recordings to boot which is part of the reason I personally couldn't be bothered looking at those recordings with any urgency. I'm also well out of date with my Mame installations, which makes it more difficult to verify or otherwise some of the newer recordings. When time permits I'll get my Mame machine working again and updated with more recent releases so I can become more active with confirmation or otherwise.
5. ...
6. I'm not trying to change the meaning of your words. You wrote what you wrote. It wasn't ambiguous to me when I answered the question, it only became apparent it was an ambiguous question once you stated your intended question in more detail, which most definitely wasn't what you asked the first time around. But again, don't worry about it anymore as it happens to all of us from time to time. That's part of the problem with written communication, you don't have the opportunity to pick up on body language and voice tone etc which makes it harder sometimes for the poster to be clear in their meaning.
7. Based on prior history of your postings and responses, absolutely.
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Sat Apr 22, 2017 7:44 am

BeeJay wrote:1. No, you couldn't play it back and the 2nd person to try could, to a reduced score. That means it's no longer up for zeroing so a) is out of the mix at that point. Even with two people getting the same reduced score, yes it takes a 3rd at that same score before we can reduce the score. In other words, as I've already told you twice previously in this topic once some people can successfully play it back to a reduced score, we can't zero it because other people can't play it back at all.
2. No I did not take it wrong I took it to mean exactly what was written. You simply wrote your question wrong.
3. No, you told me I was wrong twice in a row so I was responding to that
4. No, you went on about scores that had only recently been reported.......
5. I'm not trying to change the meaning of your words.
6. Based on prior history of your postings and responses, absolutely.


1. Is this your own rule? well it is mad. Just because 2 people can play a score which is not the claimed one, that does not mean that the fake score has to remain. Think about it, you 'll let a score which no one can play it?
2. You took it wrong, but relax, can happen to anyone
3. Because you said that lie twice
4. Same answer as before: I just report problems as anyobody other does too
5. If you don't, then accept what I say and don't try to change it. And if something is ambiguous to you then ask for additional explanation
6. I'm afraid you can't judge wisely that history
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby BeeJay » Sun Apr 23, 2017 10:02 pm

PP. wrote:1a) Is this your own rule? well it is mad. 1b) Just because 2 people can play a score which is not the claimed one, that does not mean that the fake score has to remain. 1c) Think about it, you 'll let a score which no one can play it?
2. You took it wrong, but relax, can happen to anyone. If you don't, then accept what I say and don't try to change it. And if something is ambiguous to you then ask for additional explanation
3. I'm afraid you can't judge wisely that history

1a) No, not my rule. 1b) Yes it temporarily remains 1c) Only until it meets criteria for reduction/removal of the score.
2. There was nothing ambiguous about said question until such time as you stated that that was not the question you intended to ask. It's pointless discussing this any further given you clearly believe that someone reading exactly what you wrote means that they're somehow wrong when you later tell them that the question you actually asked isn't the question you intended to ask.
3. What's unwise with assuming you'll follow your already established pattern?
BeeJay
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

Re: Vaz - dsaber -32040

Postby PP. » Mon Apr 24, 2017 7:27 am

BeeJay wrote:1a) No, not my rule. 1b) Yes it temporarily remains 1c) Only until it meets criteria for reduction/removal of the score.


How many months/years is this "temporarily?" Because 3rd person may never come.
Can you show me this rule, I'd like to read it.

BeeJay wrote:There was nothing ambiguous about said question until such time as you stated that that was not the question you intended to ask. It's pointless discussing this any further given you clearly believe that someone reading exactly what you wrote means that they're somehow wrong when you later tell them that the question you actually asked isn't the question you intended to ask.


Things are so simple and I wonder why you insist. You took wrong what I said, then you received the explanation, that's all.

BeeJay wrote:What's unwise with assuming you'll follow your already established pattern?


Which pattern?
I haven't done something strange.
PP.
MARPaltunnel Wrists
MARPaltunnel Wrists
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:53 pm
Location: Greece

PreviousNext

Return to Playbackability

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests