| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
RiskyChris
Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 21
|
 Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 4:59 am Post subject: |
 |
|
All someone has to do is show me two pictures of scores A > B where A gives 4 stars and B gives 5.
Until then, I am unsatisfied.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hannibal222
Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Same. These guys keeps saying it's about a complex formula, yet I have not seen a time where a higher score gets a lower rating. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JCirri
Joined: 04 Feb 2006
Posts: 4576
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 6:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RiskyChris wrote: | All someone has to do is show me two pictures of scores A > B where A gives 4 stars and B gives 5.
Until then, I am unsatisfied. |
Agreed.
I also just sent the following email to Harmonix in hopes of a response:
| Quote: | Harmonix Development Team:
I am the developer of scorehero.com, a site dedicated to tracking and ranking players' scores. The site is only 3 weeks old and we've already got several hundred users.
First, I'd like to thank the developers for such a wonderful game. Excellent job!
I've got one question. There is much debate as to how the 3-star to 5-star ratings are calculated. I've done much testing myself and all my results lead me to strongly believe that the score value determines the ratings. Meaning that there are ranges of scores that correspond to each rating, and that the ranges vary from song to song.
On behalf of myself and the users of my site, and as avid fans of the game, we would greatly appreciate it if you could respond to confirm or reject this theory regarding the game's rating system. As I'm continuing to develop the site, my future planning depends on this.
Thanks again and I look forward to your response.
Sincerely, |
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OtherBill
Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 65
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good luck with that, JCirri. If they give you a straight answer that we're able to verify independently, then more power to you. 
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matt
Joined: 04 Feb 2006
Posts: 3780
Location: Bethel, Vermont
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| As a programmer myself, I can vouche for the fact that just about all programmers are lazy. Which means the simplest way to determine the stars is also the most likely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RiskyChris
Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 21
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Matt wrote: | | As a programmer myself, I can vouche for the fact that just about all programmers are lazy. Which means the simplest way to determine the stars is also the most likely. |
A programmer probably didn't make the decision as to what meant 5 stars. A developer could.
The difficulty in writing numStars = [insert complex math here] and if(score>X) numStars = 5; are nearly identical.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hannibal222
Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Except that the programmer would have to write the complex math. That's...more difficult, especially since they have to do it to every song. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RiskyChris
Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 21
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hannibal222 wrote: | | Except that the programmer would have to write the complex math. That's...more difficult, especially since they have to do it to every song. |
Complex math is more difficult? Seriously it's the differece between writing:
if(score>song.5starScore) stars = 5;
and
if(streak>sqrt(song.numNotes + song.holdLength) && time4xMult > sqrt(song.length + 10)) stars = 5;
And you do it ONCE. The programmer doesn't have to repeat the same formula for every song.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OtherBill
Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 65
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Matt wrote: | | As a programmer myself, I can vouche for the fact that just about all programmers are lazy. Which means the simplest way to determine the stars is also the most likely. |
Occam's Razor: the simplest solution is usually correct.
(And programmers aren't lazy, they're just efficient.)
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hannibal222
Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RiskyChris wrote: |
Complex math is more difficult? Seriously it's the differece between writing:
if(score>song.5starScore) stars = 5;
and
if(streak>sqrt(song.numNotes + song.holdLength) && time4xMult > sqrt(song.length + 10)) stars = 5;
And you do it ONCE. The programmer doesn't have to repeat the same formula for every song. |
That doesn't take sliding into account. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OtherBill
Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 65
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 2:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
What's "sliding"?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fatespeaks
Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Posts: 41
Location: Indianapolis, IN
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cinder wrote: | okay, I'll say it here as well. Score and percent have nothing to do with stars, it's ALL ABOUT STREAKS.
I'm not joking here, everyone's trying to find cutoffs that don't exist. The game analyzes how much time you stay at x4 or x8. That's it.
Thanks. |
Ok, if that is true, then "star power" is taken out of the "star rating" equation. Not that I think anyone should waste any time on Cinders objections here, but the way to disprove that is to run through using all star power to barely pass the cut-off. End of story. BTW, I may be imagining things, but I get higher scores when I use the tremolo bar throughout a song. In the immortal words of Neil Peart, “Show me don’t tell me.”
Peace all,
fatespeaks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matt
Joined: 04 Feb 2006
Posts: 3780
Location: Bethel, Vermont
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| All proof so far has pointed to a simple score-based cutoff and not a fancy formula based cutoff. People keep submitting proof of score-based cutoffs, while people he say otherwise have shown no proof whatsoever. How bout that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SlasherManEXE 
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 2634
Location: NY
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
wtf these pics dont even exist ban this liar
also hi freebird
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UndeadFil13QC 
Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Posts: 3386
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 6:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
slahser pls
_________________
ULTIMATE GOAL: FC Im The One on GH: Van Halen Expert Guitar
Solo 2A FC Count: 39 (Best runs: many -1s, three outro chokes and two 100% overstrums!)
Side goals: GH Expert Vocals Full Series FC [4/8] | Rock Band Expert Bass Full Series FC [8/9] | COVID Vaccine & Booster 100% FC [4/4]
47| 64| 30| 70| 41| 86| 49| 48| 85| 46| 93| 42 ( 10| 65| 10)
Full Series Total: 701/702 ( 786/787) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
![Inbox [ Login ]](templates/subSilver/images/icon_mini_message.gif){kind=icon}
Inbox [ Login ]
Search
Memberlist
Profile
Log in
