BBH wrote:While your new recording doesn't use the elevator jamming trick, it still consists of sitting on floor 7 and killing enemies without making further progress in the level. I respect your ability to not get bored to death doing the most inane mind-numbing shit over and over, but trying to see who can stay awake the longest doesn't make for interesting competition. I agree with CKF's previous post that when the hurry-up music starts, it should be an indicator that you need to make progress and finish the level NOW - not stay in the center of floor 7 for an extended period of time.
Your pathetically uninformed opinion doesn't concern me in the slightest. When you tell the Ms Pac Man players that they can't go around the maze dozens of times to ensure that they get the highest possible score because it isn't entertaining enough, you won't be a hypocrite for singling out my gameplay, but you'll still sound like the Jon Snow of gaming. When someone starts telling me what I can and can't do, that's when problems start. So, I've come up with a little principle, which I call 'the principle of non interference'. This principle states that no one should be told how to play a game, unless there is a compelling reason.
Compelling reasons include:-
1. Gameplay includes a point accumulation method which any muppet could execute.
2. Gameplay produces high score, but does not demonstrate high level expertise.
3. Gameplay exploits major bugs in the game's programming.
Compelling reasons do not include:-
1. Some mendicant's saying he didn't like the gameplay.
2. Demonstrably incompetent gameplay assessment.
3. Inappropriate application of gaming regulations.
Even with a compelling reason, telling people how they should play games should be a last resort measure. Persons who call for a ban on a gaming method without first having thoroughly examined said method are control freaks, and ought not to have any say in matters of intervention.
I am the inventor (and, possibly, sole practitioner) of the floor 7 point accumulation method. If you wish to learn a few facts about it, you will listen to what I have to say, and ignore the uninformed and simplistic opinions of those who have merely observed my method in action.
Firstly, defending a floor 7 position is not easy. Perhaps it looks easy when I do it, but anyone with a brain knows that something which seems simple in the hands of a master may actually be very complex. On floor 7, it's all about tracking your opponents, maintaining your shot accuracy, and not getting lulled into a false sense of security. Playing floor 7 is just like playing the rest of the game: most of the time, your opponents blunder into your bullets, and their shots are easy to avoid; but, every so often, there comes a critical moment, when one decision will see you survive, and another will see you dead. Anyone who can learn my method with little time and effort is entitled to dismiss it as “point leeching”. As of now, I have seen no evidence that anyone has earned said entitlement.
Since I've demonstrated a high level of expertise at the game, and have not exploited any bugs in order to attain my score, I see no compelling reason for anyone to interfere with the way I choose to play it. I did not play the game in this way to entertain anyone, I did it to make a score higher than anyone else's.
Since your powers of observation seem to be inadequate, I shall explain a couple of things. Firstly, I do not choose the amount of time I spend on floor 7. What I choose is to make as many points as possible, while the elevators are uncontrollable, a period which lasts approximately 70 minutes. Thus, if I wanted to spend only 30 minutes making points, I would have to commit virtual suicide by trying to complete the level using unresponsive elevators. Secondly, when elevator control is restored, I complete the level, therefore my gameplay is ultimately progressive. I have seen multiple replays on this website which display nonprogressive gameplay, and these have drawn no comment whatsoever. Unless you wish to garner a reputation for blatant double standards, I suggest you work on your arbitration skills.
Definition of terms used
Muppet: someone whose thought lacks originality and who is incapable of deep comprehension
Mendicant: someone who displays ignorance of common tools, such as the 'Esc' and 'F10' buttons