Thank you caffeine.. I took a very good lesson in my face this summer.. I've been massacred (3-0 and 3-2) by a "medium" guy which had never passed lv 500 in master mode.. It was on Tetris&Dr M but that is a proof "battle" require a lot of concentration and weak or medium player have their chance against strong players..
There needs to be clear differentiation in referring to the native fall/lock speed (the speed the game throws at the player), minimum allowed player speed (the slowest speed the player can play at without dying), and maximum theoretical player speed (how fast a hypothetical perfect player can go, minus the waiting-times the game instates).
so is there any way for us mac users to play a DTET like game? i really like it but i have limited use of a windows box
DTET is closed source. But its rotation system is supported in the latest Heboris which has been ported to Mac using SDL I believe. That's as close are you're going to get to a DTET port. When we're talking about speed here we're talking about maximum proven speed. I don't like hypothetical speeds... It tends to encourage premature dismissal of ARE among other things. As for minimum required speeds and whatnot, those are very interesting in discussions of gameplay, challenge, and learning curves, but that is a very different discussion. We're only talking about the bottom line here. Though if we want to degrade into a childish debate la jago above, I'll go ahead and say that TGM3's 3 pieces/sec is superior to other games with comparable speeds because the player is actually getting mostly tetrises the whole time.
so, since i can't read japanese is there anyone here who can give me the link to the latest Heboris mac download.
I usually play more 4-Player with skill levels 16,17,18.. (because you can't set them all to the same level).. But in vs. CPU.. I think I can manage level 16-20.. Just need to learn to keep your cool.. And also, when the CPU is doing combo's on you.. You should try to combo back to reduce garbage. ____________________________ Sorry for the uproar conversation. I enjoy a good Tetris discussion - but I'm afraid things might have gotten a little messy.. Especially on my part.
Whoa! I made a mistake, I wanted say "Prince" and not senior.. [/quote]All my SNK favorite character will own your poor Capcom character because blablabla...
Unfortunately the C++ ports have been stagnating for a while, and as far as I know, only the YGS-based Windows versions have DRS right now.
I have my doubts as to whether interpreting a 180 degree rotation differently from two 90 degree rotations is good for the game in general. First there was 90 degree rotation in both directions. Then there was wall kick. Then SRS wall kicks that move the tetromino to a position that does not overlap the old position. Now DTET adds 180 degree rotation. As I understand it, DTET allows moves similar to this: Code: | | | | | | | JJ | | | | | | J | | | | | | J | | | | | | | => | JJ | => | | |XXXXX XXXX| |XXXXXJXXXX| |XXXXXJXXXX| |XXXXX XXXX| |XXXXXJXXXX| |XXXXXJXXXX| |XXXX XXXX| |XXXX XXXX| |XXXXJJXXXX| `----------' `----------' `----------' What's next? Reflection? Code: | | | | | | | LL | | JJ | | | | L | | J | | | | L | | J | | | | | => | | => | | |XXXXX XXX| |XXXXX XXX| |XXXXXJJXXX| |XXXXX XXXX| |XXXXX XXXX| |XXXXXJXXXX| |XXXXX XXXX| |XXXXX XXXX| |XXXXXJXXXX| `----------' `----------' `----------' Or how about Star Sweep style placement, where the tetromino can just move and rotate past any blocks in its way as long as it ends up in a gap? Code: | | | | | | | ZZ | | Z | | | | ZZ | | ZZ | | | | | | Z | | | | XXXXXXXX| => | XXXXXXXX| => | XXXXXXXX| | XXXXXXXXX| | XXXXXXXXX| | XXXXXXXXX| |XXXXXX XXX| |XXXXXX XXX| |XXXXXXZXXX| |XXXXX XXX| |XXXXX XXX| |XXXXXZZXXX| |XXXXX XXXX| |XXXXX XXXX| |XXXXXZXXXX| `----------' `----------' `----------'
I've often thought that I would like 180, but I eventually realized that not only is it bad for the game, that it isn't even the same game anymore if you include it. Tetris is a strictly 2d game, and introducing a 180 would break away from that. Tepples second example is the one that seals it. In 3d variants it's necessary, but for a strictly 2d game, it's not possible.
but why isn't it possible in 2d? it just seems arbitrary to me to say "okay, you can transfrom this tetromino into two different orientations from here, but i'm not going to let you transform it into its third orientation. for that, you'll have to first transform it into one of the first two." i guess it would depend on your definition of tetris, but i've always seen tetris as tetrominoes + clearing rows. reflection is totally different because then you're dealing with free polyominoes-- not one-sided polyominoes. wall kicks are necessary to smooth 20g, but i really don't see these crazy "not even touching" type wallkick's really helping that much. that's kind of like the same argument for easy spin-- it's not like lack of timed locking will help a player clear x lines any faster.
The concept of 180 rotation offends me in 20g... It just isn't even remotely possible that the rotation is physically possible in some cases. In 0g I have no problem with it though. Really though it's almost the same as rotating twice if you're fast.
How about this: "ok, you can move this tetromino, but I'm not going to let you move it past this row of blocks. For that you'll have to clear out these lines first." Pipe Dream and Star Sweep allow moving the piece past other blocks and then placing it into the field with the hard drop button. It's just a generalization of wall kick. Including Tetris Blast, Tetris Attack, and Tetrisphere? That's why I prefer to define things other than in terms of a trademark. If the goal is not to clear x lines but to clear the bottom line, then of course ridiculous wall kicks and untimed locking will help, as shown in this TDS video.
I think these games are pretty far from Tetris. The best example would be Egg Mania, which is a game about falling ominoes that allows what you describe. Though this game isn't very time attack friendly, and it's a feature to give the player options more than anything else.
Why then doesn't the concept of initial rotation system offend you? Wouldn't the lack of IRS prevent a lot of moves TGM players frequently use to overcome downward orientations? Afterall, initially rotating once, then after ARE rotating again, is essentially the same thing as double rotating--same number of frames used, same end effect. No matter how fast you are, you're never going to save that one frame. Sure it doesn't seem like much, but in conditions where the game allows you less than fifteen frames before locking (see shirase), even with my lightning quick reflexes and stunning good looks, I sometimes can only fit one rotation in. or how about this: "okay, you can transform this tetromino into one alternative orientation from here, but i'm not going to let you transform it into it's second or third orientations. for the second, you'll need to transform it from the first, and for the third, you'll have to do that, plus once more." lots of people are comfortable with single rotation--to them it just feels natural and right. but would you really have favored alexey and his friends not putting in that extra feature of 270 rotation as well as 90? how is 180 any different? i agree that a certain merit exists to keeping a tradition going. there's comfort in continuity, but do you see how even though we're comfortable with one thing doesn't mean that another thing is better-- or even more logical? right, and this argument relies a lot on the goal. maybe this is just my preference, but i find the the goal of clearing x lines in y time more relevant. maybe turning tetris into a frozen-in-time, turn-based puzzle game would be interesting, but everyone loves a speed run. people just can't get enough of seeing players go outrageously fast. there's something unique about pushing the limits, and i think 180 fully supports that.
IRS is like a mild floor kick. Unlike DTET's 180 key, IRS doesn't let you snap the L into that space, as I illustrated. For comparison, Lockjaw treats its 180 key as two presses of the counterclockwise key. That's why the game gives you two counterclockwise keys. Rotation behavior for 90 and 270 degrees can be made symmetric: the wall kicks for rotating an L clockwise can be the horizontal reflection of the wall kicks for rotating the J counterclockwise, and vice versa. Besides, when Tetris came to American video game consoles, it already had both 90 and 270. Tetris 2 and The Next Tetris disagree with you. And Nintendo did it all for the cookie in Tetris DS. Granted, and that's why I added "rotate left twice" to LJ. However, I never envisioned adding a separate wall kick table for the 180 key.
So then my question turns into "why don't mild floor kicks offend you?" 180 doesn't let you do that, a wall kick does. pressing them both in the same frame makes a double rotation? i didn't know tgm had double rotation. Why do you keep mixing wall kicks into this? i was talking about why 180 was logical, not wall kicking. when tetris came to america, it had what? one wall kick?
I can beat: ADVANCE/Lv 200/Grade 24 within 3 attempts *NOTE* I only ever play with 1 life (Both me and CPU). Grade 25 is hard but very possible to beat. - Jono
