|
|
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Icemage
Joined: 11 May 2008
Posts: 3200
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:17 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| internetguy87 wrote: | | Should I go back and delete any score I may have dropped ticks on in RB2? Just cause RB3 randomly decides to change its stats screen and how it scores doesn't mean we should change what we consider a FC on SH. |
It was mentioned above, but it bears repeating. This is exactly the same sort of situation you have in GHWT. It's very close to impossible to 100% FC anything that isn't an all-talky song on that engine, but since it only requires Solids to hold combo, it's actually not that hard to FC.
Should those people go back and post their 80% FCs as 100%? No? If not, then why should RB3 be any different? It's a 99% by how the game measures percentages. It's what will show up on the official leaderboards, and - for better or worse - the engine is doing exactly what Harmonix told it to do, which is let you FC all sections but give you a 99% score if you drop ticks (or maybe even fractions of a tick).
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ProffessorJoe  
Joined: 02 Feb 2008
Posts: 1681
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Where is the proof that band quickplay cutoffs are lower? If you can't accept that this 99% glitch occurs without dropping ticks because there is no proof, then i don't see why the band quickplay scenario is much different. If i get some free time over the next few days i will try and get the 99% glitch to occur on an optimal song just to prove that this really is a glitch. If i do i will post it here immediately.
This game does not judge you based on how much pitch you hit. This game judges your percentage by the total number of phrases hit out of the total number of phrases in the song. When this number = 100% but the screen shows 99%, its a glitch IMO.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MasterNobody
Joined: 11 Jul 2008
Posts: 2791
Location: Duxbury, MA
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
ScoreHero has always operated mostly on the honor system. How about we say if you are "certain beyond reasonable doubt" (or some other fancy legal-sounding term like that) that you did not drop a single tick and your 99% was purely a glitch and not a result of dropped ticks (the reason the 99% FC exists), than you may input your score as 100%. Would allowing for that make everyone happy, theoretically speaking, or are there some of us that believe purposeful 99% FCs with dropped ticks should be allowed to input 100% as well?
I don't mean to interject my opinion on either side of the argument with this post, I just think it is good to get a feel for where we all stand on what I've asked, and maybe we can find some common ground.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
internetguy87
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 3505
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Icemage wrote: | | internetguy87 wrote: | | Should I go back and delete any score I may have dropped ticks on in RB2? Just cause RB3 randomly decides to change its stats screen and how it scores doesn't mean we should change what we consider a FC on SH. |
It was mentioned above, but it bears repeating. This is exactly the same sort of situation you have in GHWT. It's very close to impossible to 100% FC anything that isn't an all-talky song on that engine, but since it only requires Solids to hold combo, it's actually not that hard to FC.
Should those people go back and post their 80% FCs as 100%? No? If not, then why should RB3 be any different? It's a 99% by how the game measures percentages. It's what will show up on the official leaderboards, and - for better or worse - the engine is doing exactly what Harmonix told it to do, which is let you FC all sections but give you a 99% score if you drop ticks (or maybe even fractions of a tick). |
I have never played GHWT, but I assume solid is not the highest rating. That's the first big difference. To continue streak on RB3 you need to hit at least 99.1% of the phrase and still get the same awesome rating that is the highest you can achieve.
To put it in perspective how much you must hit, if you assume that very few phrases last beyond 2 seconds (I assume the average person isin't missing on long drawn out phrases as often), that's requiring you to hit all but about 18ms of a phrase, and even left when you realize it's not a continuous pitch.
The average vocalist probably has lag issues where their calibration is almost off 18ms.
A big departure from GH.
My stance on this, and I am sure this differs from most, is that if it shows 100% in every single section in the section by section breakdown then you get 100% for a song. Seems crazy I know. The average of 100% can clearly not be 99% so seems pretty much like a glitch to me.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RJUCPU 
Joined: 28 Jan 2007
Posts: 1827
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| internetguy87 wrote: | | My stance on this, and I am sure this differs from most, is that if it shows 100% in every single section in the section by section breakdown then you get 100% for a song. Seems crazy I know. The average of 100% can clearly not be 99% so seems pretty much like a glitch to me. |
This exactly. If your stat screens show 100% then it's 100%.
And as internetguy also pointed out, guitar/bass isn't penalized for dropping ticks on sustains and it happens all the time. Not just occasionally, ALL the time. Why should vocals be any different? It's not. There are songs that are so sustain heavy that should you drop all the sustain ticks you would be playing less than 50% of the song. Yet you still achieve a 100%.
To say a vocalist truly has 99% because they dropped a tick, even though it's recorded as 100% and the stats all show 100% would mean every single guitar score entered that doesn't match the calculated sustain tick score should also show as 99%. It should be treated exactly the same.
It's not an intentional change by HMX to make scoring more strict, everything about this game points to the opposite. This is a glitch. Plain and simple.
I'd rather see no percent entered than all these 99%'s it just trashes up the leaderboards. I personally would never enter a 99% FC, I'd just redo the song (which I have done when I got the 99% on an optimal with NO dropped ticks, obvious glitch). Wish I had known this issue would arise, I'd have taken a pic =/
_________________
Last edited by RJUCPU on Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:54 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Icemage
Joined: 11 May 2008
Posts: 3200
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm still not seeing the logic in defying the final screen. Scorehero has always used the results screen as the final arbiter of what is acceptable for entry.
Yes, I know Harmonix can't do math. We've known this for quite some time (Glitchkrieg Bop in RB1, loltastic RB2 leaderboard career scores, RB3's weird solo vs. band GS cutoffs, and this 99% FC "feature" in TBRB/GDRB/RB3). This is something that's been in the engine for over a year, and while it would certainly be nice to see a fix (and I totally understand wanting one), I really don't see the value in artificially manipulating reported scores unless you'd like to submit video or picture proof on every single one of these 99% FCs with the final More Stats screen showing the xx000 Accuracy score as proof, and I think that puts a little too much bookkeeping into an already tedious process.
This isn't to say I agree with Harmonix's vaguely insane interpretation of "zomg you missed a total of 0.51 ticks total in this song, you obviously only earned 99%". But that's not the same thing as agreeing to this sort of proposed "revisionist history" that would be very hard to prove without a lot of extra work.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RJUCPU
Joined: 28 Jan 2007
Posts: 1827
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What it all boils down to is sloppy programming. They didn't intentionally tell the mechanics to calculate a 99%, it's an oversight and they're just plain out too lazy to fix it.
Whether anyone here wants to believe it or not, we are a drop in the bucket when it comes to players and sales. We are not the target demographic and they really don't care about the diehard &/or elite players or what is considered an "FC" (they have never, and will never use this term officially, it's a SH generated term). If it's too much work to fix and the other 90% of the population that buys the game doesn't care then why bother. The focus is "party game" nothing more.
It's all contradictory. If it calculates the individual sections at 100% it should calculate the final score screen at 100% and not do them independently. If you drop ticks on a phrase or section it should report 99% there if it's going to report 99% overall. It would make more sense if this were the opposite scenario. The individual sections of the song are smaller and missing ticks would affect the overall percentage more than the overall total of all phrases.
This community is not official. These leaderboards are not official. The active players on this site are not part of the grand scheme of this game. This community can do whatever it wants, set whatever standards it wants, make whatever rules it wants. As the game changes, maybe some of those "always has been" rules should be revisited. Just because that's the way it's always been done doesn't mean it's the best way to move forward.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PlexShaw
Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Posts: 332
Location: London, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bclare wrote: | | You input whatever the results screen says. |
That's assuming you can still read it after throwing your microphone through the screen in frustration at the glitch itself and Harmonix's "can't be arsed" attitude towards fixing it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Icemage
Joined: 11 May 2008
Posts: 3200
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RJUCPU wrote: | | This community is not official. These leaderboards are not official. The active players on this site are not part of the grand scheme of this game. This community can do whatever it wants, set whatever standards it wants, make whatever rules it wants. As the game changes, maybe some of those "always has been" rules should be revisited. Just because that's the way it's always been done doesn't mean it's the best way to move forward. |
I'm not disagreeing at all with your post.
I'm simply putting forth the position that it is a LOT more work to allow people to post 99% final screen scores as 100% than to just leave them as 99% since everyone knows the engine is f'ing broken. There's a good practical reason for the results screen - it's easier to verify, and generally requires no nuanced interpretation. Every 100% score would have to have picture proof of the final screen posted with the Accuracy score visible, because it won't show up on the official leaderboards as 100%.
Would it be nice to be able to put in 100%s because the game really ought to be giving them to us? Sure. Anyone who is competitive and cares about these things, however, will obviously know about the 99% thing and take that into account when browsing scores. And if they don't, then who cares what they think?
There's also a fairness issue for people who don't actually read the vocals forum; how are they to know they could put in a 100% score if such were allowed?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
internetguy87
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 3505
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Icemage wrote: | | RJUCPU wrote: | | This community is not official. These leaderboards are not official. The active players on this site are not part of the grand scheme of this game. This community can do whatever it wants, set whatever standards it wants, make whatever rules it wants. As the game changes, maybe some of those "always has been" rules should be revisited. Just because that's the way it's always been done doesn't mean it's the best way to move forward. |
I'm not disagreeing at all with your post.
I'm simply putting forth the position that it is a LOT more work to allow people to post 99% final screen scores as 100% than to just leave them as 99% since everyone knows the engine is f'ing broken. There's a good practical reason for the results screen - it's easier to verify, and generally requires no nuanced interpretation. Every 100% score would have to have picture proof of the final screen posted with the Accuracy score visible, because it won't show up on the official leaderboards as 100%.
Would it be nice to be able to put in 100%s because the game really ought to be giving them to us? Sure. Anyone who is competitive and cares about these things, however, will obviously know about the 99% thing and take that into account when browsing scores. And if they don't, then who cares what they think?
There's also a fairness issue for people who don't actually read the vocals forum; how are they to know they could put in a 100% score if such were allowed? |
Why do we need picture proof? SH uses the honor system, and before this game no pct was ever recorded. If the pct's were not included online, then no one would even know if someone was doing this wrong.
Also, chances are if someone doesn't read this forum or a posting about it, they aren't trying to climb the leaderboards on here too much.
By the same logic, how does this player know that he CANT put 100%? If he sees that he kept combo the entire song, wouldn't he be inclined to write 100. We never know...
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Icemage
Joined: 11 May 2008
Posts: 3200
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| internetguy87 wrote: | Why do we need picture proof? SH uses the honor system, and before this game no pct was ever recorded. If the pct's were not included online, then no one would even know if someone was doing this wrong.
Also, chances are if someone doesn't read this forum or a posting about it, they aren't trying to climb the leaderboards on here too much. |
Frankly, it's all a tempest in a teacup as far as I'm concerned since I don't chase the leaderboards at all these days, but it seems to me that SH goes to pretty great lengths to avoid having controversy over what scores are accurate, and posted scores can be challenged at any time by any member.
What happens to someone when someone gets a score challenged and didn't get a pic of the Accuracy score? They can't go to the online leaderboard to prove it - it says 99%, and the setlist score screen will say the same thing.
There's absolutely nothing to differentiate these missed tick/partial tick 99% scores as opposed to someone who legitimately breaks combo on the last phrase but still gets a great score, and that's a problem IMO.
| Quote: | | By the same logic, how does this player know that he CANT put 100%? If he sees that he kept combo the entire song, wouldn't he be inclined to write 100. We never know... |
That's a black swan argument. Anyone transcribing their score is probably doing it with the score in front of them on the screen and it'll show that big fat 99% in giant typeface.
Maybe for people who only scribble down their point values for mass data entry later, but it's not like you're not going to notice that you didn't get 100% at the end of a song.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RJUCPU
Joined: 28 Jan 2007
Posts: 1827
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Icemage wrote: | but it seems to me that SH goes to pretty great lengths to avoid having controversy over what scores are accurate, and posted scores can be challenged at any time by any member.
|
This is true. However, percent has absolutely NOTHING to do with score. There are no percent leaderboards. As long as the score is accurate and correct who really gives a rats ass what percent is noted. Entering the percent adjusts the stat box to reflect your 100%'s which, imo, is basically a player vanity item which helps us keep track of our FC's. In RB and later GH days FC has even been removed so there's no way to determine overhits or overstrums which are even less FC than the 99% glitch.
I've never once heard of or seen a player get banned or a score report because they inadvertantly typed 99% instead of 98% (absolutely zero difference between that and 100% vs 99%). People mistype percents, don't look at them and guess, etc etc etc. There are 9%'s on leaderboards. The only thing you will never see is over 100% because it's blocked.
Since the leaderboards here are based on the actual song score I think the player should have every right to enter 100% in these instances. It changes nothing. Their standings remain exactly the same. If they can score high enough to achieve a top 5 score then it should be understood that they could FC and probably did FC the song or they wouldn't have achieved that ranking. So why not allow people to use the tools provided and keep track of their FCs instead of dilute their stats based on a programming error?
I also think having all the 99%'s cluttering up the higher rankings on the songs makes it MORE difficult to find a true error or mis-posted score. I've reported lots of scores or sent PM's to the individuals based on things like that. When you see a 99% in the 2nd place ranking you could assume it was probably a typo or a fake. Now there will be no way to differentiate what truly is a "99% FC" and a 99% fake/error score.
_________________
Last edited by RJUCPU on Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:13 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bclare
Joined: 21 Jun 2008
Posts: 6048
Location: Boston
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RJUCPU wrote: | | However, percent has absolutely NOTHING to do with score. There are no percent leaderboards. As long as the score is accurate and correct who really gives a rats ass what percent is noted. |
I completely agree with this. However, if you don't give a rat's ass what percent is noted, then why not just put in what the results screen says?
_________________
I'm back I suppose |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RJUCPU
Joined: 28 Jan 2007
Posts: 1827
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bclare wrote: | | RJUCPU wrote: | | However, percent has absolutely NOTHING to do with score. There are no percent leaderboards. As long as the score is accurate and correct who really gives a rats ass what percent is noted. |
I completely agree with this. However, if you don't give a rat's ass what percent is noted, then why not just put in what the results screen says? |
Because for one....
| RJUCPU wrote: | | I also think having all the 99%'s cluttering up the higher rankings on the songs makes it MORE difficult to find a true error or mis-posted score. I've reported lots of scores or sent PM's to the individuals based on things like that. When you see a 99% in the 2nd place ranking you could assume it was probably a typo or a fake. Now there will be no way to differentiate what truly is a "99% FC" and a 99% fake/error score. |
And exactly which results screen should you use? The detailed one? or the Summary? Because that's all you're looking at here is the summary and the breakdown and detail evidently means nothing.
and two....
I would never put in a 99% score because I personally would never settle for entering a score where I knew I had dropped ticks and would redo the song.
Why not just do completely away with percents entirely? They offer no merit to the leaderboards.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bclare
Joined: 21 Jun 2008
Posts: 6048
Location: Boston
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RJUCPU wrote: | And exactly which results screen should you use? The detailed one? or the Summary? Because that's all you're looking at here is the summary and the breakdown and detail evidently means nothing.
and two....
I would never put in a 99% score because I personally would never settle for entering a score where I knew I had dropped ticks and would redo the song.
Why not just do completely away with percents entirely? They offer no merit to the leaderboards. |
You should use the main results that you see without having to scroll.
And if you just re-do it to get a 100%, that's fine. If you input a score as 100% and you actually got 100% then there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Furthermore, you don't need to put in a percent, score is the only required field. If you don't want to put in a percent fine, but if you're going to put it in then you should put in what the overall percent says on the results screen.
_________________
I'm back I suppose |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Copyright © 2006-2024 ScoreHero, LLC
|
Powered by phpBB
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
VIDEOS: (Please subscribe!)
