Semi-serious suggestion, but it might be a little late now.....I think we change this to a low score contest for those who beat it, or add point racking? The only way to get a "high score" is to point rack. Someone who is good at this game and knows where to go/what to do will have a lower score after beating the game then someone who doesn't know what to do. Provided they don't die, the person with less experience will have a higher score because they will have wondered around the mazes for a while racking up points.

You know, I thought about this since the beginning of the contest. A lower score while beating the game prove that you do a very swift minimalist run, which is quite hard especially when it comes to the last stages. Avoiding most enemies instead of killing them can help if you have trouble stomping on enemies ( it is hard at first), but later in the game, it is definitely harder trying to ignore all enemies versus killing them regularly to clear spaces.

Otherwise, the only way I found to get a bigger score without intentionally racking points was to pass everywhere in stages to collect every lunch bag. While this makes a few areas a bit harder at some point than going right to the goal, it's still on the fence with intentionally racking points.

I have a big problem about allowing point racking in general for the contest, particularly because you can get whatever score you want without much effort by throwing rocks on broken pipes at the organ boss. In the other hand, with a minimalist run, the organ boss is reversely interesting, since not throwing rocks at broken pipes is tricky, and every rock thrown at wrong pipes would count as a penalty.

Personally, I would suggest the following:

Everybody who beat the game in one life have rank priority. Lowest score wins.

For those who don't beat the game in one life, the stage you're at when dying is the most important factor. Example: Every players that died at stage 3 have priority on players that died at stage 2.

For players who died at the same stage, lowest score gets priority. While this last rule can be a bit contradictory, cause getting farther in a stage might gets you a bigger score, it's still not that big of a deal.

Participation point would now be: Get to the second stage (Sewer stage).
Since nobody posted a score achieved on the first stage, it's not problematic.

Thoughts?

 

I'd been thinking this last night realizing, there ain't nobody really playing, and if they are, how are they to best my score, since I got all the way through the game, without point racking unless they themselves also reach the end or near to it and just happen to take more paths and kill a bit more enemies since in some places I avoided such so as to not risk a life, it wouldn't really be possible. I was thinking, this weeks contest is really lame. Your thoughts of a low score sounds okay to me, not sure how well that would work, but if anyone else is in agreement with this I'm up for trying it the first moment I get a chance at it. So the higher the level of the game you reach you get priority over those at lower levels reached, any that die on the same level, the one with the lesser score takes priority?

Yeah, I wouldn't actually want point racking in this game, that would be just awful/no fun at all. I was just pointing out that it's hard to have a 'high score' contest and no point racking rule for this specific game, due to the maze like levels.

But what you said about highest stage/lowest score wins is exactly what I was thinking.

It's an interesting idea. It would definitely be more skillful to get as far in the game as possible with the least amount of points.

 

Yeah, the least amount you'd be able to get in each level that has one would just be beating the bosses. Should be interesting and rather challenging, I'll start on this soon to see how I do.

You got it right Megan.

Do you guys feel we should give priority to players that died at boss battle over those that died throughout the stage? This would be significant for level 2 and 3 especially.

Well, since we're all on the same page about this, we can consider the new rules as accepted.

21,500

 

Well, if new rules have been accepted, done! And will get together a video upload for it soon. By the way, for me, there wasn't much of a difference on the difficulty, high score, low score, whatever. Still, it was an interesting idea that I didn't mind trying out.

Hint: one way to get by enemies without stomping on them, if you pick up a lunchbag, while your health is replenishing you can freely just crash through them and no health will be lost and you won't have to risk collecting points trying to avoid them by jumping, time food collection right and it will act as a brief form of invincibility. this technique I used a lot in the very last level, but it can be used anywhere to assist you in getting by with low points.

Video of low score gameplay:

Lowest score upon beating game without dying 8,400

Now that this is a low score contest, this is how the scoring will take place. If you beat the game, your score will take precedence over all the other scores. For those who don't beat the game, the farther you get in the game, the higher you will finish on the scoreboard for this game. For example, those who get to level 3 will finish higher than those who get to level 2. Now, if two players die in the same stage, the lower score takes precedence. However, if someone dies at a stage boss, that person's score will take precedence over anyone who died in the stage but didn't make it to the boss.  For example, if someone dies at the organ boss in stage 2, their score will be higher than someone who died n stage 2 before getting to the organ boss.  The participation will now be get to level 2. These rules have already been outlined by guillavoie earlier in the thread, which he posted earlier this week. If anyone has any questions, please feel free to send guillavoie or myself a PM.

No time to try this one out since I'll be at the Tetris Tourney all day tomorrow but it seemed very complicated. I'll try next weeks game.

56800
First time I done one of these contest things.

http://i1107.photobucket.com/albu...

 

Were you trying for a low score or high score, because that's a pretty high score? Probably too high.

Really? You just get a low score, rather then a high score.  If the level thing is confusing, don't worry about it. Just play the game, and post your lowest score. People in charge can take care of the rest.

How does someone get a low score you ask? Easy, don't kill anything you don't have to.

edit, new score below


Changing the rules made the game a bit more fun.

This is it for me. No time...

Agreed on the rule change though. Perhaps we could do this with other games if possible?

6,700 (Stage 3?)

9,300

Surprised I was able to make it this far in stage 4.

8,400

7,800 (Game completed)

 

Was just waiting for that. Figured if mog didn't pull off getting less than my score, you would. Pretty cool that mog and I both got the same score at the end though.

Yeah, I'm quite satisfied with my score. At first, I was thinking beating the game in one life would be a piece of cake, and aimed to do a 6 thousands and something score, but I must admit those charging tomatoes in stage 4 gave me a bunch of trouble to get through. I only managed to beat the game in one life once, after playing about 2 hours and a half today.

ATTACK OF THE KILLER TOMATOES RESULTS

1st: 7,800 (Game Completed) – guillavoie +10 points
T-2nd: 8,400 (Game Completed) – Miss Clawful +7 points
T-2nd: 8,400 (Game Completed) – MrMiniMog +7 points
4th: 9,300 (Stage 4) – bimmy_lee +4 points
5th: 56,800 (Stage 3 Boss) – TheOne +2 points

PARTICIPATION

6,700 (Stage 3) – ookii_risu +1 point
21,500 (Stage 3) – nechestriah +1 point
5,600 (Stage 2) – Benihana +1 point
6,500 (Stage 2) – MuNKeY +1 point
6,600 (Stage 2) – GhaleonsDeadMyFriend +1 point
7,500 (Stage 2) – xtremegamer +1 point

Since Megan and Mog both tied, the points for second and third place were added together and divided by 2 to get 7 points a piece for both of them.

So I just realized something, what's wrong with this picture? I don't get it. :/ So we tied, but how does us having higher points at the end of the game get a lower rank and less points for the contest?

Two things.

1. This was a low score contest. If more than one person lost a life on the same level, the lower score took precedence.

2. Since you and Mog both tied, the available points for 2nd & 3rd places were added together (8 + 6 = 14) and then divded between you two (14/2 = 7). We have used this formula in the past when ties have occurred.

 

oops, okay, totally forgot about the low score thing. damn senile brain!