Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Discussion about MARP's regulation play

Moderator: BBH

Haze
MARP Knight
MARP Knight
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2002 5:04 pm

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by Haze » Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:53 pm

kranser wrote:
Phil Lamat wrote:Super Puzzle Bobble has still puzzle and vs mode, but another debate to come :
http://mamedev.emulab.it/haze/misc/spuzbobl/0013.png
And also this: http://mamedev.emulab.it/haze/misc/spuzbobl/0035.png!

http://mamedev.emulab.it/haze/misc/spuzbobl/0036.png shows the normal route selection, but http://mamedev.emulab.it/haze/misc/spuzbobl/0035.png indicates that several courses are available (maybe in the same way as in racing games?!).

Kranser.
the difficulty selection is for the puzzle mode..
'Training, 5 stages only'
Normal
Expert (different stages?)
Warp Zone (don't know what this is, a random selection of the stages?, it went from A1 (not the same a1 as the other modes) to b1-4, then g/h ... )

the chain reaction / no chain reaction is for vs.cpu

kranser
MARP Knight
MARP Knight
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2002 11:23 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by kranser » Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:43 am

Thanks Haze - can you make any screenshots showing the 2-player puzzle mode, where two players can work together to clear the puzzle screen? [this mode is unique as it is not in any previous puzzle bobble games - however, as it is 2-player it is not suitable for MARP :(]

Thanks in advance,
Kranser.

User avatar
Phil Lamat
Regulation Coordinator
Posts: 2014
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2002 9:19 am

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by Phil Lamat » Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:18 am

Haze wrote: the chain reaction / no chain reaction is for vs.cpu
I think this "chain reaction" is the one which is avalaible only with pbobble4, and which makes 10M graps harder to do

Haze
MARP Knight
MARP Knight
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2002 5:04 pm

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by Haze » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:43 pm

kranser wrote:Thanks Haze - can you make any screenshots showing the 2-player puzzle mode, where two players can work together to clear the puzzle screen? [this mode is unique as it is not in any previous puzzle bobble games - however, as it is 2-player it is not suitable for MARP :(]

Thanks in advance,
Kranser.

Image

Image

Image

Image

It's puzzle bobble, with 2 players ;-)

Haze
MARP Knight
MARP Knight
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2002 5:04 pm

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by Haze » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:45 pm

there's this too.. bit slower than super puzzle bobble due to the resolution tho

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


kranser
MARP Knight
MARP Knight
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2002 11:23 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by kranser » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:33 pm

Haze wrote:there's this too.. bit slower than super puzzle bobble due to the resolution tho
Thanks Haze for the pictures of spuzbobl 2-player and flipmaze! Very nice pics!

I don't know if anyone has asked yet - but how fast does spuzbobl run? Would it be possible to reach 99-100% on some systems?

Kranser.

User avatar
mahlemiut
Editor
Posts: 4133
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2002 10:05 pm
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by mahlemiut » Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:06 pm

G-Net is PSX-based, so I'd figure that it'd be more or less the same as other PSX-based systems.
- Barry Rodewald
MARP Assistant Web Maintainer
Image

Haze
MARP Knight
MARP Knight
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2002 5:04 pm

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by Haze » Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:55 pm

kranser wrote:
Haze wrote:there's this too.. bit slower than super puzzle bobble due to the resolution tho
Thanks Haze for the pictures of spuzbobl 2-player and flipmaze! Very nice pics!

I don't know if anyone has asked yet - but how fast does spuzbobl run? Would it be possible to reach 99-100% on some systems?

Kranser.
it's 180% ingame on a 3ghz Core2Duo. Drops down closer to 100 on the 3d cutscene parts.

Sadly it suffers from the usual PSX looping sound bugs, and as the music CPU / chip isn't currently emulated, lacks music.

It will be in 130u1, as it's been added to the current SVN now.

User avatar
mahlemiut
Editor
Posts: 4133
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2002 10:05 pm
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by mahlemiut » Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:24 pm

So, about the same speed as Rival Schools (also PSX-based), although that being said, Rival Schools runs at a high resolution, and high CPU speed (100MHz).
- Barry Rodewald
MARP Assistant Web Maintainer
Image

Haze
MARP Knight
MARP Knight
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2002 5:04 pm

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by Haze » Fri Mar 13, 2009 4:54 am

mahlemiut wrote:So, about the same speed as Rival Schools (also PSX-based), although that being said, Rival Schools runs at a high resolution, and high CPU speed (100MHz).
Well Gnet is zn2 based, so also runs at 100mhz.

kranser
MARP Knight
MARP Knight
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2002 11:23 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by kranser » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:45 am

kranser wrote:
***PL*** wrote: Kranser raises some good points, but one thing that has been not discussed is DEMAND. If only a couple of people want special rules for a specific hard course, then why bother?
I agree that demand would play a factor if for example we were adding many splits, but for adding one extra split for hard mode (and that split could even just be on the parent (Euro region?) of the game if demand was really an issue) I wouldn't consider demand to be an issue, as there are some unknown factors:
A) Would the -hard versions (with added "challenge" factor) attract more players (old players coming out of the woodwork and brand new players wanting a challenge!)
B) Current demand has no bearing on possible future demand!
***PL*** wrote: My initial reaction is that the pbobble programmers blew it. They created more difficult routes but did not increase the points awarded for completing those stages.
I'd agree with you there - especially as the levels appear to be laid out in a logical order of difficulty (easier on the left and harder on the right). Well - seeing that having a different high score table for each route would be very confusing - so Taito couldn't have done that, I'd agree that extra points for completing the difficult levels would certainly change the challenge factor of the Puzzle Bobble games.
***PL*** wrote: Part of gaming has always been for players to figure out which methods give you maximum points -- there is no better measure -- unless you want to independently challenge yourself, which in turn improves your skills on the pre-determined "best path".
True - however for Puzzle Bobble and for Popnpop especially, the best path for points is always straight down the left-hand side! So not much to figure out really!
***PL*** wrote: I think a good compromise would be to have only ONE additional course, in effect an "easy" course which already exists, and the suggested "hard" solution. However, as Phil had mentioned, these would extend to several games beyond the pbobble series.
Agreed. So what games should MARP consider adding a -hard mode for? pbobble2, pbobble3, pbobble4, spuzbobl, popnpop, puzznic?

Kranser.
Well, no-one else has added any further games that suffer from this problem - so Puzzle Bobble, Puzznic and Pop'n'Pop seem to be the ones people are concerned about.

I would consider this to be both a split and a regulation change (seeing that the 'hard' splits would need special rules explaining which difficulty and route need to be played), so does that mean that I need to open a vote thread on this, or Pat, does the decision lie entirely in your court?

What still needs to be considered is:
A) The demand on this - and whether splits are required irrespective of demand.
B) Whether all clones (regions) of the games would need splits - or just the main region (probably related to A - demand).

Kranser.

User avatar
***PL***
Editor
Posts: 651
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2002 9:37 pm

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by ***PL*** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:23 pm

What you suggest needs to be approved by the Regulation Coordinator first. (BBH)

I think if you disagree with a negative decision, you can start a poll to overturn.

Don't remember the exact process, maybe Zorhik or Gameboy9 remember the exact process. Editors haven't been challenged in a while!! :lol:

gat
Button Slapper
Button Slapper
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:38 am

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by gat » Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:31 am

I don't know about any of the other Puzzle Bobble games but Puzzle Bobble 2X the most points productive route is not straight up the left hand side but all the way up the far right up to the 'Z' ending and on Puzzle Bobble 4 the best path for points I have found ends on the '?' ending. With regards to there being another track then I believe that one extra track for the games that have an expert mode would suffice as it would still be up to the players to figure out the best points productive route, which is not necessarily up the left hand side.

kranser
MARP Knight
MARP Knight
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2002 11:23 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Please reconsider splits on puzzle bobble-style games

Post by kranser » Sat Apr 04, 2009 12:07 pm

gat wrote:I don't know about any of the other Puzzle Bobble games but Puzzle Bobble 2X the most points productive route is not straight up the left hand side but all the way up the far right up to the 'Z' ending and on Puzzle Bobble 4 the best path for points I have found ends on the '?' ending. With regards to there being another track then I believe that one extra track for the games that have an expert mode would suffice as it would still be up to the players to figure out the best points productive route, which is not necessarily up the left hand side.
Thanks for the information Gat.

For the best points productive route, do you consider only normal game play or also the possibility for building up one or two 17+ drops (per stage) to give the maximum drop bonus?

Kranser.

Post Reply