1. SF2 series/SFA 2,3 - Arcade (Ill give $100 to whoever beats me at this)
I sincerely hope for your sake that you are joking.
HONDA BEST MAN
but then you take my 75 perchance chance of winning, if we was to go one-on-one, and then add 66 and two-thirds ch...percents...i got a 141 and two-thirds chance of winning at sacrifice
Wait, people didn't know how to bunnyhop in quake in 1999? Wasn't the game pretty old even then?
Some speedrunners were already using BH in regular Quake, but in TF, I didn't see commonly used in pubs and matches until much later. There were also quite a few people who quit Quake because of BH, but BH is the reason why I kept playing it for so long. It makes Quake the fastest and most intense first person shooter out there IMO.
Josh the FunkDOC wrote:
I sincerely hope for your sake that you are joking.
It makes Quake the fastest and most intense first person shooter out there IMO.
heh, TF1.5 was the fastest before the bunnyhop speed was capped to 150% of normal speed. It was funny seeing an HWguy chasing after a scout while firing and still be able to keep up with, and even pass the guy without much trouble.
Joined: 4/25/2004
Posts: 615
Location: The Netherlands
o_0 how can i forget smashbrothersmelee
although i am still unable to defeat that final boss (ok, plural, level 51), i have done all the rest.
they really ought to release a second version of that game. i think its one of the best games i've played on the cube, or at least one that doesnt bore once you've finished it.
Joined: 11/13/2004
Posts: 4
Location: Turku, Finland
1. NHL Hockey '94 - Sega Megadrive/Genesis (best in the world :)
2. Turbo Sliders - PC (www.turbosliders.tk) (2nd best in the world)
3. Sensible World of Soccer - Amiga/PC
4. Elasto Mania - PC (www.moposite.com) (Around 100th best)
5. Pro Evolution Soccer 1/2/3/4 - PS2
6. Winning Eleven 6/7/8 - PS2
7. Indy Heat - Amiga
8. Generally - PC
9. NHL 95 - PC
10. Ice Hockey - NES
In the order that I thought of them:
Smash Bros (N64)
Columns (Genesis)
Boulderdash 2 (C64)
Landstalker (Genesis)
Dragon Force (Saturn) (needs multiplayer capability, damnit)
SSX series (PS2)
Tony Hawk 3 (PS2) (according to my sister's BF, "SSX is Tony Hawk on snow")
Intelligent Qube (PSX)
Bust a Move/Puzzle Bobble (PSX)
Super Puzzle Fighter 2 Turbo (PSX/Saturn)
Are we limited to video games?
#1. Capcom vs. SNK 2.
#2. Tetris, although I've long since retired.
#3. Probably Mega Man 3.
#4. What I'm fourth best at? Gets kind of vague here. Probably a fighting game, side-scrolling platformer, or Twisted Metal 2.
I would think the only game I had a drop of skill in was Super Smash Bros. Melee. I rocked as Jigglypuff. Then I didn't play for a long time and lost what skill I had.
1. Warcraft 2 (I was awesome back in the Kali days)
2. Interstate '76 (anyone else play this?)
3. Goldeneye (N64) - I would challenge any 3 people I knew and smoke people in 3vs1 at parties at stuff. Good times. When I found someone who thought they were too good to 3vs1, and instead would play 2vs2, me and my brother would team up to REALLY embarass people. Then for fun I'd put him on the other team for a 3vs1 and smoke them all just for good measure. I only met one person in my life who could beat me more than 1/20 games, and he would only play with his own lame rules which I hated. I still smoked him though, just not as bad as I destroyed most people. I'd play 3vs1 first to 20 points and never die once.
4. Warcraft 3, not as good as warcraft 2, because warcraft 3 is easy for n00bs to play competitively. In warcraft 2, if you weren't awesome I'd overrun you in about 8 min. In my college dorm I'd play people in warcraft 2 as 4 or 5 vs 1, and I only lost 1 game (on a water level). They weren't the best players, but still playing 5 people at a game like warcraft 2 was pretty impressive. In warcraft 3, any 2 players could beat even the world's best single player because of how the game is set up.
WarCraft 2's resource model is very primitive in that there are essentially no diminishing returns in assigning more workers to gather. Most people don't know how to safely and effectively exploit that, so of course it's easy to beat large numbers of average players. Even in more reasonable games like StarCraft, multiple "merely decent" players can be taken down by lesser numbers of "good" players because of economic imbalances.
Also, a note on WarCraft 3: though I honestly don't know, I can't believe it is that difficult for very competent players to defeat more numerous opponents. I don't own the game, but my college roommate and I were in the beta, and also played on some of the most popular bnetd beta servers (for those not lucky enough to get an autoberth into the beta ;) ). There is no word for what we were other than awesome, and literally, quite literally, we never lost a game (except against each other). We regularly played 2v3's, 2v4's, and occasionally 3v5's and 3v6's when we could locate a partner we thought was good enough. That being said, I didn't play 1v2 (though I consider 2v4's tougher), and I don't own the game because my experiences in the beta didn't convince me it was worth owning when I considered StarCraft the better game. I realize about a million new abilities were added in retail, and then there's the expansion, and then there's the post expansion neutral heros and items ... but I just can't believe the core game dynamic has changed so much that it is impossible to 1v2.
"WarCraft 2's resource model is very primitive in that there are essentially no diminishing returns in assigning more workers to gather. Most people don't know how to safely and effectively exploit that, so of course it's easy to beat large numbers of average players."
There is an upper limit to how many workers can be in a mine. I think its 15 or so.
But the resources advantage isn't really what keeps you from being about to 1vs2 in WC3. Its upkeep and the food limit. Unless you have absolutely the wrong units for the job, 200 food army > 100 food army.
"I consider 2v4's tougher"
Not in this game.
There were lots of imbalances in the beta. Huntresses, Banshees, Necros, orc casters, orc towers, Hero abilities (mana burn for 300 damage!), etc etc etc. All of that eventually got ironed out. Even the best players lose sometimes. I seriously doubt the 2 of you could beat any 4 average players. Its just not possible because of upkeep and the food limit.
And the way the game is now, I doubt you could even win a 2vs3 against 3 average people. 3 people rush = gg for you. There is no amount of skill that make up for that. The game is too balanced.
"I just can't believe the core game dynamic has changed so much that it is impossible to 1v2."
Believe it.
Get on battle.net, even playing the original version.
I'll be happy to 1vs2, you can even pick the races of me and my teamate :)
Given my lack of knowledge I have deferred to a higher authority ... no, not you. Take the following quote with whatever grains of salt you will, but I have spoken with someone who has this to say about his own skill:
"yeah i'm ok. not world champ because i don't care to be or at least thats my convenient excuse. showtime steamrollered me every damn time but i know what good is."
And this is to say about your WC3 arguments:
"uhm ... its untrue? showtime has a number of 1v2 demos where he wins handily. and they are better than average players. and youre right its easier to 1v2 in sc than wc. clearly because wc3 requires more micromanangement ... against 2 average players, i do not hesitate to say a top player on the asian ladder could win 95 out of 100 times. my guess is this guy just doesnt know how to play the game ... he has a poor strategic grasp of the game, he is ineffective at macro control of the map, and his micro blows because wc lets you be lazy like that and its not obvious if youre not good because the game is paced so different in some ways compared to the one we all love, sc, all hail boxer, i cried at the end of game 5, too. bifrost is his map @#$%ing damn it."
Anyways, I'm not going to bother any of my friends about this argument any more, and I really don't have a leg to stand on myself when talking about the game in its current incarnation, so this'll be my last post on the subject. Feel free to get in the last word.
I'll be happy to 1vs2, you can even pick the races of me and my teamate :)
"my guess is this guy just doesnt know how to play the game ... he has a poor strategic grasp of the game, he is ineffective at macro control of the map, and his micro blows because wc lets you be lazy like that and its not obvious if youre not good because the game is paced so different in some ways compared to the one we all love, sc, all hail boxer, i cried at the end of game 5, too. bifrost is his map @#$%ing damn it." "
Haha.
I suck because I can't win 2vs1's?
This is the dumbest thing I've seen on this board.
Sorry, ask any Warcraft 3 player, 2 vs 1's are impossible unless you play complete noobs.
The game is set up that way.
gg
Joined: 7/5/2004
Posts: 551
Location: Karlstad, Sweden
Megaman 2 (NES)
Megaman X (SNES)
Turtles 2 (NES)
Turtles 4 (SNES)
Chip 'n Dale (NES)
Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 (PS)
Bubble Bobble (NES)
Donkey Kong Country (SNES)
Joined: 12/25/2007
Posts: 86
Location: Muhos, Finland
1. Super mario bros 1 (nes)
2. Super mario bros 3 (nes)
3. Chip 'n dale rescue rangers 2 (nes)
4. Super mario world (snes)
5. Tony hawks undergound 1 or tony hawks pro skater 4 (playstation 2)
6. Doom 1&2 (PC version, console versions like sega x32/gba sucks)
7. Tetris (too many)
8. Contra (nes)
9. incradible Crash the dummies (nes)
10. Kirbys dream land 1 (game boy)
<small>Big signature cleared by admin; read <A>forum rules</a>.</small>
<small>-Me:..and big sig. was just small picure(two row's), It dont even lag my 3660's web browser >_></small>
Oooh. What a fun ancient topic to dig up.
1. Night Warriors - I'd been playing Street Fighter in the arcades for a while and could hold my own, and I loved Darkstalkers immediately when it first popped up in a local pizza shop, but its sequel (despite having what I considered a drastic decrease in aesthetics) was definitely the first game to totally consume me. To this day, I have never been defeated as Jon Talbain. I stopped using him against humans after a while because of the horrible disadvantage it gave my opponents.
2. SoulCalibur and its sequels - I was never really that great at SoulEdge/SoulBlade, but from SoulCalibur onward, Taki is the closest thing I have to Jon Talbain when it comes to characters I've learned backwards and forwards. Unlike JT, however, I cannot claim an undefeated record.
And for the game I play reasonably well but wouldn't last one match in tournament play:
Street Fighter III series - I can slaughter the AI, but mostly because I don't rely on parrying. I despise the parrying system, and consider it the worst thing to happen to the series. That said, I still managed an MSF medal with Yang in 3rd Strike.
Honorable mention:
SVC Chaos - While employed at Gamestop, my Street Fighter-obsessed assistant manager jumped on the SVC demo while we were closing. After expressing my interest in joining in, his response was, "silly little girl, you can't hang!" Terry destroyed him in record time.
I'd put Tekken on the list, but Tekken 5 has made me feel like a failure. First time Yoshimitsu has lost to AI opponents in years.
I've forgotten what it's like to have an ego. :o
FPS - I'm really not very good at FPS's to be honest. The only one I have the illusion of an advantage in is UT 2004, because I have the movement system down to a science (mostly by playing trials maps...although I'm no good at those either). That doesn't make up for shitty aim, though.
Beat-em-up - Streets of Rage 2. On a good day I can beat Hardest on default settings without losing a continue as Max. I know that's not really impressive, but whatever.
Platformer - I typically suck at most platformers (the most embarassing case recently being Super Mario Galaxy, the game everyone says is too easy).
RPG - Almost all RPGs are fundamentally easy to most people, so there's no real point in saying which one I'm best at.
Fighting - I suck at fighting games, period.
Shoot-em-up - Same as above.
RTS - Same as above.
General strategy/puzzle games - Same as above.
Now that I think of it, I can't think of a single game that I'm exceptionally good at.
Vs. Fighters
My strongest contention probably comes in Tekken 4/Tag Tournament, where I play as Lei/Kunimitsu. I am also a big fan of Darkstalkers (hello Felicia), but 2d fighters are just too fast for me. In MVC2 I play as Felicia/Doctor Doom/Colossus. In SSBM I play as Mewtwo. Laugh all you like!
Puzzle
I used to be great at DRMBM, but I haven't played it in a while.
Strategy
Total Annihilation is my weapon of choice here; I did quite well in the Boneyards campaigns, but I would suspect I suck nowadays. :)
For those of you who remember the Battle Isle series, I also thoroughly enjoy a good ass-kicking on Incubation. For some reason it doesn't seem to work on Windows XP. Yes, I've tried the usual fix.
FPS
Hell, I still speedrun Quake, so you'd think I'd be good at Deathmatch. But I'm not. I usually do well in Quake 3 (at least in LAN games I've played at), but I am probably not good enough to enter any leagues. I like Counter-Strike, but my machine holds me back there. ;)
Generic Action
I'm also pretty darn good on Subspace/Continuum, an old old 2d topdown space MMO. I'm not the best, but I regularly beat people 1v2 and get positive records in Division matches in my favoured ship, the Javelin.
My main category of gaming is RPG, which is somewhat skill-unmeasurable, except for 'action RPGs' like Diablo II. I'm okay at that, but nothing special.
Super Metroid is by far the game I am best at, TAS or not. Playing it since around 2000 I estimate that I have completed it somewhere between one and two hundred times (from start to finish that is) and have reached times few others have. My knowledge of the game is also by far greater than that I have of any other game.
After that I don't really have any games that I truly stand out in, in both Castlevaina AoS and DoS I have reached low times though (probably my favorite speedrunning games after SM)
I'm also quite decent at Starcraft (though that perception would likely be changed if I tried to enter a tournament of any kind) and I'm totally roxzors on Elite Beat Agents and Elasto Mania :)
I suppose I could also mention Sonic CD, given that I played through it once per week from 1993 to 1998, give or take. If Sega CD rerecording ever gets into shape, I'll be all over it.
Joined: 4/30/2006
Posts: 480
Location: the secret cow level
Once upon a time I was preternaturally good at Tekken/SC. I would spend up to four hours a day, at least three days a week practicing. I can't do that any more, I just don't have the time, patience, or will to spend that much time on a game.
