Richard's 1.25 video: 1.,213,580 from Koryan is on his Twitch highlights, under a video titled "[NES TETRIS] 635,920 post-transition PB (577k to 1.2M)". I still have no idea how to link Twitch stuff. There's a chance Koryan has more 1.2 games that aren't here/highlighted. I recall a 1.23 or something that was actually a CTM qualifier, which is absurd.
I got a 1,214,840 but it was on the same piece sets ROM (because it was in a match), idk if it counts twitch.tv/videos/500421647 (linking automatically embeds a null video for some reason)
@Classic Tetris WRs — try to remember the sequence of hundreds of pieces and places for each of them, and then play the game so as not to be mistaken once. IMO, even if someone played constantly with the same set of pieces, it is practically impossible to play such a game perfectly and achive 1.2M. This would probably require several months of training, hundreds or even thousands of tries (something like platform games speedruns). But this is quite a controversial topic. Fun fact—in various speedruns (e.g. Super Mario Bros.), players intentionally use specific RNG to make the game easier and achieve shorter game times. This is absolutely allowed in every category of speedrun. However, in the tetris community, the use of a specific RNG would most likely be considered cheating and the result would be discarded.
Piece distributions on any determinism mod are not going to match those of the original game, so it makes sense to separate them.
Due to the way NES Tetris massages its random numbers, any (decently programmed) deterministic sequence should be completely probable on a vanilla cartridge. So any score you can make on a deterministic mod should be possible on an unmodified game given proper RNG. If Galoomba can make that score on a modified game, I have faith in their skill to do it on an unmodified one. That said, I agree with Kitaru. Even slight negligible alterations in the piece distribution routine is enough to make the score invalid on an actual score board. It's just not the same game.
Yeah, "not the same game" is usually how I think of subtle version differences like this. The level of skill demonstrated is not in question, but the differences in rules and constraints make it not directly comparable. @Sumez -- I think what makes the RNG determinism vs. entropy-collecting thing difficult is that a) there are likely differences in the exact piece weights, b) there are potentially situations where the stack heights make it impossible to receive a given piece (or at least impossible to receive with the placement choice the player made), and c) there are are piece sub-sequences that would be demonstrably impossible to receive in the original NES Tetris piece selection code. For instance, in a CTWC-style determinism mod (pieces are selected from shuffled "decks" of pieces), something like four I-pieces in a row would be exceptionally rare but technically possible. In the original NES Tetris piece selection code (pieces are selected using more directly from the underlying Linear Feedback Shift register and basic math operations to achieve mod8 and mod7), it is fundamentally, mathematically impossible to receive four I-pieces in a row; there are interactions between the current value of the piece index counter and the underlying LFSR for which an I->I re-roll will never occur. (In fact, O-piece is the only piece that is capable of infinitely flooding.) So, without getting into the fuzzy area of points (a) and (b) above, we know from (c) that there could potentially be games played on a determinism mod that could never be replicated on the original game.
You could do it like they do it in chess. In chess they have a woman's category and even separate titles for women that have lower requirements. But they do not have a men's category. The two categories in chess are mixed and women.
Hello I gathered screenshots of all my C scores Scores in ascending order: 1,206,488 1,210,740 1,211,421 1,220,597 1,226,389 1,230,942 1,239,480 1,255,171
It wasn't on the maxout trainer. I don't record games if I'm not streaming, and I would not add anything to the list that doesn't have a video, so discount it.
I would suggest a different formatting for the 1.2m club (Maybe also rename as over 1.2m club to fit the new 1.3 record also there? Till there are multiple 1.3 scores?): <number> <name/nick> <highest-score> [<next-known-highest> ...] Would give a much better overview of who has reached it and how often vs current list that fudges both metrics quite heavily.
Nenu has 3 1.2 games apparently. Here's a clip of one. https://clips .twitch. tv/IgnorantEphemeralKuduDuDudu One day I will figure out twitch links.
